YALE DIVINITY SCHOOL LIBRARY Gift of THE NEW-CENTURY BIBLE JEREMIAH AND LAMENTATIONS THE NEW-CENTURY BIBLE •GENESIS, by the Rev. Prof. W. H. BENNETT, Litt.D., D.D. •EXODUS, by the Rev. Prof. W. H. Bennett, Litt.D., D.D. "LEVITICUS AND NUMBERS, by the Rev. Prof. A. R. S. KENNEDY, M.A., D.D. ?DEUTERONOMY and JOSHUA, by the Rev. Prof. H. Wheeler Robinson, M.A. •JUDGES and RUTH, by the Rev. G. W. Thatcher, M.A., B.D. •I and II SAMUEL, by the Rev. Prof. A. R. S. Kennedy, M.A., D.D. •I and II KINGS, by the Rev. Prof. Skinner, D.D. »I AND II CHRONICLES, by the Rev. W. Harvey-Jellie, M.A., B.D. •EZRA, NEHEMIAH, and ESTHER, by the Rev. Prof. T. Witton Davies, B.A., Ph.D., D.D. •JOB, by Prof. A. S. Peake, M.A., D.D. •PSALMS (Vol. I) I TO LXXII, by the Rev. Prof. Davison, M.A., D.D. •PSALMS (Vol. II) LXXIII TO END, by the Rev. Prof. T. Wiiton Davies, B.A., Ph.D., D.D. •PROVERBS, ECCLESIASTES, and SONG OF SOLOMON, by the Rev. Prof. G. Currie Martin, M.A., B.D. •ISAIAH I-XXXIX, by the Rev. Owen C. Whitehouse, M.A., D.D. •ISAIAH XL-LXVI, by the Rev. Owen C. Whitehouse, M.A., D.D. •JEREMIAH (Vol. I), by Prof. A. S. Peake, M.A., D.D. •JEREMIAH (Vol. II), and LAMENTATIONS, by Prof. A. S. Peake, M. A., D.D. •EZEKIEL, by the Rev. Prof. W. F. LOFTHOUSE, M.A. DANIEL, by the Rev. Prof. R. H. Charles, D.D. •MINOR PROPHETS: Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, by the Rev. R. F. HORTON, M.A., D.D. •MINOR PROPHETS: Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malacmi, by the Rev. Canon Driver, Litt. D., D.D. •i. MATTHEW, by the Rev. Prof. W. F. SLATER, M.A. »2. MARK, by the late Principal Salmond, D.D. •3. LUKE, by Principal W. F. Adeney, M.A., D.D. •4. JOHN, by the Rev. J. A. M=Clymont, D.D. *fl. ACTS, by the Rev. Prof. J. Vernon Bartlet, M.A., D.D. •6. ROMANS, by the Rev. Prof. A. E. Garvie, M.A D D •7. I and II CORINTHIANS, by Prof. J. Massie, M.A D D •8. EPHESIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, PHILIPPIANS, by the Rev. Prof. G. Currie Martin, M.A., B.D. •g. I and II THESSALONIANS, GALATIANS, by Principal W F Adeney M.A., D.D. ' ' »io. THE PASTORAL EPISTLES, by the Rev. R. F. Horton M A D D •11. HEBREWS, by Prof. A. S. Peake, M.A., D D »i2. THE GENERAL EPISTLES, by the Rev. Prof. W. H. Bennett, Litt.D., •13. REVELATION, by the Rev. Prof. C. Anderson Scott, M.A., B.D. [Those marked* are already published.] Hm ESiclnrr-gU Gongi-a^Hea.! Tkstitrtt* T. C.&E.C. Jack, EcLLiibiirgh. Cagyrigrit - Jalia Bnjdioloinew & Co. £0e QtewCentutg (giBfe General Editor : Principal Walter F. Adeney, M.A., D.D. 2ltttm\a§ and &,amtntbtiow VOL. II JEREMIAH XXV to LII LAMENTATIONS INTRODUCTION REVISED VERSION WITH NOTES MAP AND INDEX EDITED BY A. S. PEAKE, D.D. SYLANDS PROFESSOR OF BIBLICAL EXEGESIS IN THE UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER TUTuR IN THE PRIMITIVE METHODIST COLLEGE, MANCHESTER, AND LECTURER IN LANCASHIRE INDEPENDENT COLLEGE ; SOMETIMS FELLOW OF MERTON COLLEGE, AND LECTURER IN MANSFIELD COLLEGE, OXFORD NEW YORK: HENRY FROWDE OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, AMERICAN BRANCH EDINBURGH : T. C. & E. C. JACK Yale Divinity Library New Haven. Conn. The Revised Version is printed by permission of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge PREFACE In sending forth the second volume of this work I desire to renew my thanks to the scholars named in the Preface of the first volume, and add an expression of gratitude to those whose writings have been helpful for the Commentary on Lamentations, especially Lohr, Budde, and Cheyne. I am grateful for the cordial welcome which the first volume has received, and trust that its successor may be equally fortunate. I should like, however, to take this opportunity of meeting some criticisms which have been urged in a friendly spirit by two competent reviewers. Prof. Jordan (Review of Theology and Philosophy, vol. vi) thinks that it would have been an improvement to print the 'poems of Jeremiah' in parallel lines. But this would have been to depart from the practice which obtains in the series ; it would have made demands on space that could be ill afforded ; and the permission to print the Revised Version hardly Jlncluded the permission to rearrange it. And where a text has been so expanded by glosses as is often the case with ours, the attempt to indicate poetical struct ure could not be satisfactorily carried through ; since Sthe poetical form could not be indicated unless the f glosses were removed from the text. But in a work *like the present the editor has no right to tamper with ^the Revisers' text. What Prof. Jordan wishes is an admirable object in itself; but could be legitimately oe. attained only in an independent translation. On the criticism that too much space is taken up £for the quotation of conflicting opinions I may say ^that my practice was adopted quite deliberately. It f^is an injustice to the student for an editor to impose his own view, which may be wrong, upon him, without VI PREFACE giving him warning that eminent authorities take a different view. And in a Commentary on Jeremiah it is specially incumbent on the writer to observe this rule, in view of the very important work recently done on the book, which is not accessible to the English reader ; of the new problems which have been raised ; and the fact that much information required by students in Universities and Colleges is as yet provided for them in English nowhere else. My friend Prof. Bennett finds my treatment of Jere miah and the Chaldean party more one-sided than what I should have given in a more technical work (Review of Theology and Philosophy, August, 191 1). Anything he said on an Old Testament subject would always claim my careful attention ; but especially would this be the case in a subject where he has himself done such admirable work. It is one of the misfortunes incident to the piecemeal publication of this work, that impres- ' sions have been made by the summary statement in the Introduction to the first volume, which would perhaps have been removed by the qualifications which are given in the second volume. I have left my notes on the episode of Hananiah as they were written before Prof. Bennett's review appeared ; and I trust that he will feel that I have done full jus tice to Hananiah's sincerity. But I cannot retreat from my conviction that Jeremiah (I say nothing of ' the Chaldean party,' of which I know next to nothing) was entirely in the right in the policy he laid down. Here, I fear, there is a real difference between us ; but I hope my judgement is not warped by the hero-wor ship to which I am happy to plead guilty. ARTHUR S. PEAKE. December 15, 191 1. FACE 3 CONTENTS JEREMIAH Text of the Revised Version with Annotations LAMENTATIONS Editor's Introduction .... S8Q I. Position in Canon, and Title . . . .289 II. Literary Form a8o III. Authorship and Date 292 IV. Selected Literature 297 Text of the Revised Version with Annotations . 301 Index 351 Map. The kingdoms of Judah and Israel . . affront THE BOOK OF JEREMIAH CHAPTERS XXV-LII REVISED VERSION WITH ANNOTATIONS II THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET JEREMIAH [B] The word that came to Jeremiah concerning all the 25 xxv. Judgement on Judah and the Nations at the Hand x of the Chaldeans. With this chapter we return from the reign of Zedekiah to that of Jehoiakim. The fourth year of that monarch, to which the oracle is assigned, was a critical year not merely for the prophet and for Judah but for universal history. In it Jeremiah received his commission to collect all his prophecies, that the people might have an opportunity of escaping by amendment of life from the evil which Yahweh purposed against them. In this year, accord ing to xl vi. 2 (though it may have been a year earlier : see note on xxv. i), the battle of Carchemish took place, in which the defeat of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar settled the contest between Egypt and Babylon for the rule of Western Asia in favour of the latter. This year was therefore critical not only for the Jews, since it trans ferred them from the short-lived suzerainty of Pharaoh to that of Nebuchadnezzar, but for other peoples as well. It was fitting therefore that Jeremiah should at such a time gather up his teaching for one great cumulative appeal ; and we might anticipate that he would, as a prophet set over the nations (i. 10), embrace them also in his survey of the situation created by this decisive turn in the fortunes of his world. Such an anticipation seems to be justified by the present chapter, in which the prophet not only appeals to his long-continued warnings to Judah and predicts the vengeance of God upon it, but includes many peoples in his vision of judgement. But although the chapter seems to suit the historical situation, it presents numerous critical difficulties, which have excited such suspicion that several scholars have rejected its authenticity alto gether, while others eliminate considerable parts of it. The most noteworthy fact about the chapter is that between 13 and 15 the LXX has inserted the oracles on the foreign nations, xlvi-li (xxv. 14 being absent in the LXX). The order in which these chapters are placed differs in the Hebrew and the Greek text, but this is a matter to be considered when these chapters are discussed. But the criticism of the present chapter is connected with that of xlvi-li in two ways. A denial of the Jeremianic origin of the B 2 4 JEREMIAH 25. i. B people of Judah in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son oracles on the foreign nations tends to draw with it a rejection of xxv. And there is also the question whether these oracles originally stood in immediate connexion with xxv. The former of these questions cannot be profitably" discussed at this stage ; it belongs rather to the examination of these oracles. It must suffice to say at this point that, while in their present form they contain not a little non-Jeremianic matter, they yet have a genuine nucleus ; so that we may approach the present chapter without any prejudice against its authenticity derived from a similar con viction with reference to the oracles on the nations. The second question, however, calls for attention here. It cannot be denied that this chapter is closely connected- with the oracles on the nations. In both cases the: same peoples to a large extent recur with considerable, though by no means complete, agreement in order. Eurther xxv. 13 refers definitely to a book in which » prophecy against Babylon is contained, and such a prophecy we have in 1-li. But is the position accorded to these oracles by the LXX after xxv. 13 original ? In its present form xxv. 1-13 leads up well to such a series of oracles on the nations, and the reference to ' this book ' implies that a collection of oracles was appended. Moreover, the LXX takes the closing words of xxv. 13 as a title to this collection. Probably the Hebrew should also be interpreted in the same way (see note on 12-14). But, if so, we have definite evidence that at one time xlvi-Ji stood after xxv. 13 not only in the LXX but in the Hebrew text itself. It is nevertheless very improbable that this was its original position. The insertion of these oracles at this point tears xxv in two, separating sections that are really connected. Further, the vision of the goblet of Yahvveh's wrath obviously cannot have followed the detailed prophecies on the nations. It leads up to them ad mirably, but its effect is completely lost if it is placed after them. And it is questionable whether xxv. 1-13 was fitted in its original T? , ¦«, an »ntroduction to xlvi-li. Schwally (in Stade's Zettsckrift for 1888, pp. 177-217) has argued that the original text '"'j? ! undereone .a revision in the LXX which has been carried a stage further in the Hebrew. Cornill, on the basis of Schwally's investigation, defends the position that it is only in J^ ™\*f fo™ th*' the passage constitutes a good "ntro" t^J^Z^l'/"^ thesec°nd ^vision was definitely intended to fit it for this purpose. If so, the same conclusion would result that xlvi-li did not originally follow xxvi-to The vahdity of this last argument is rather a problem in the detailed exegesis of the passage, but the other argumenTs suffice to render it improbable that the oracles against the Tforli™ J s are correctly placed in the LXX S * °re'sn natIons JEREMIAH 25. i. K S of Josiah, king of- Judah ; the same was the first year of What then was their original position ? In view of the fact that in the Hebrew they once occupied the same position as they now hold in the LXX, it is not an arbitrary suggestion that they were originally connected with xxv, a suggestion which is corroborated by the community Of subject-matter. Since, however, they must follow rather than precede the vision of the goblet, we should pro bably place' them at the close of xxv in its original form. But this raises the further question as to the reason for their transposition from the close of xxv to the position they now hold in the LXX and once held in the Hebrew text. Cornill points out that a difficulty was created by the fact that the anticipations expressed in the vision of the goblet of Yahweh's wrath were not really ful filled after Carchemish, so that it became advisable to detach the oracles on the nations from the vision, a course which was also recommended by the feeling in the later period that such a vision was too great to be treated as a mere description of political cata strophes, and had to be brought into connexion with God's final judgement on the world. In confirmation of this he points to the working over which xxv. 15-38 has experienced. This has been in the direction of heightening the apocalyptic character 'of the passage, and turning'it into a description of the Divine' judgement on the nations as the later Jewish eschatology conceived it. But tbe vision as thus transformed no longer permitted the oracles on the nations with their relevance to the historical situation to stand as its explication, and this provided a further reason for removing them from their original connexion. The date in xlvi. 2, 'in the fourth year of Jehoiakim,' was identical with that in xxv. 1, and occasioned the connexion with xxv. 1-13, from which, with the exception of the title, the oracles on the nations were subsequently removed to the position they now hold in the Hebrew text. The question as to the authenticity of the chapter still remains, Schwally, who has discussed it in connexion with xlvi-li, has pro nounced against its genuineness, and the same view is taken by some other scholars. As against 1-13 even in its earliest form he argues that it cannot be authentic, not only because it contains the most general ideas which would be suitable at any time, but because 'it does not contain any reflection on the possibility of repentance, which is never missing in Jeremiah's propheeies, not even in those which were uttered near the end of the siege of Jerusalem (p. 184). Cornill replies that this Objection overlooks the difference between the situation in the fourth year of Jehoi akim, and the close of Zedekiah's reign. In the former case it was an upheaval affecting the whole of Jeremiah's world, for which Judah had no responsibility ; in the latter case it was 6 JEREMIAH 25. 2. B Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylori; the which Jeremiah a dispute between the king of, Babylon and his rebellious vassal. Moreover, after Carchemish mattershad.turnedout quite differently from what might have been expected. It was natural to anticipate that Nebuchadnezzar would act with the same ferocity as other con querors, and we can 'well understand that Jeremiah believed that at last the foe from the north had come to fulfil his long-deferred prophecies of judgement. But matters took an unexpected turr^ Nebuchadnezzar after his victory at Carchemish learnt of his father's death, and had to return to Babylon, after concluding peace with Pharaoh. Thus Jeremiah, remembering the mercy of/God in averting this catastrophe, could exhort his countrymen to reforji) even after Zedekiah had broken his oath of allegiance, whereas in 605 he had no reason to expect anything but the worst, and there fore no longer called them tp repentance. . The genuineness of xxv. 15-38 is set aside on grounds similar to those which are urged, against xlvi-U, and because Jeremiah is "not allowed to be a prophet to, the nations. Neither grpund'is conclusive ; for the former see the' discussion of thpset, chapters, for the latter what is said in vol. i, pp. 77, 78. Cornill pointed out in his Introduction to the Old Testament that the figure of the goblet of Yahweh's wrath is absent from the earlier, literature, but after Jeremiah's time becomes promine,nt. Giesebrecjit, who agreed fhat there was a genuine Jeremianic element in the passage, replied that Cornill hacl (Overlooked Nahum iii. 11,. Cornill, however, does not admit that this passage, 'Thou also shalt be drunken,,' has any reference to the cup of Divine anger, and still maintains that the currency which the metaphor received after Jeremiah's time points to its Jeremianic origin. Giesebrecht in his second edition repeats his objection without any reference to Cprnill's reply. We may accordingly recognize a genuine element in both sections of the chapteri A discussion of the extent to which it lias undergone editorial expansion may be left for, the notes, xxv. 1-7. In the fourth year of Jehoiakim Jeremiah reminded his people how, since the thirteenth year of Josiah, he had urged them to abandon their evil waylthat they might dwell in the land, but they had refused to listen. • . _,, 8-ii. Therefore the northern people will come against their land and the surrounding peoples, and lay the land waste, and the Babylonian supremacy shall last seventy years. . ' : 12-14. Then after seventy years the king of Babylon shall be punished, and the land of the Chaldeans shall be desolate, accord ing to all that is written in this book;. and many nations shall make them their servants. Thus Yahweh will requite them for their deeds. j, : ¦¦.»:. n\n: JEREMIAH 2 s. 3. it JS 7 the prophet spake unto all the people of Judah, and to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying : [JS] From the 3 thirteenth year of Josiah the son of Anion; king of Judah, : . 15-29. Yahweh bade me take from His hand the cup of His fury, and make the nations drink, to whom He sent me. So I took the cup and made trie nations drink it, beginning" with Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, then Egypt and other kingdoms. He told me to bad them drink, and fail, never more i, to 'rise. And if they refused I must tell them in" His name thaf they should surely drink; for He would begin His chastisement with His own city, and they should certainly not be spared. 30-33. Yahweh will roar against Judah, and shout as inthe treading of the grapes against all the inhabitants of the world; The noise of -battle |s,he,ard. twseh. ssntLis; clearly a ccLrrfictiou ; this confirms the vjew that the verse, is a later htsertiar*.. . r r .¦ ¦ ., 5. sayingr. _, According to the; present text! this must connect With 4*; and 4'' ('but . . . hear 'Xmust be treated as a parenthesis. But when 4 and the last clause'cof 3 have been struck out (see preceding note),r-if. connects wi$l»/f I have spoken unto yon'&c in 3, and introduces the content of Jeremiah's preaching. ¦» and dwell: expresses the consequence that will follow from obedience to the injunction ; . true reformation will secure the permanent enjoyment of the land, which in Yahweh's original intention had been allotted .to. them as their perpetual inheritance the LORD hath given. The LXX ' I have given 'is probacy JEREMIAH '25. 6-8. JS J 9 from of old and even for evermore : ^and go not after other 6 gods to serve them, and to worship Ithem, and provoke me not to anger with the work of your hands ; and I will do you no hurt. Yet ye have not hearkened unto me, 7 saith the Lord ; that ye might provoke me to anger with the work of your hands to your own hurt, [j] Therefore 8 not to be preferred. It is a correction of the Hebrew, carrying out more consistently the consequences of the insertion of 4, in which Yahweh is represented as the speaker. • v 6. Cornill treats this as an insertion, on the ground, that the dose of 5 forms a natural conclusion to the summary of. the prophet's message, after which nothing more is to be expected. Duhm retains it, regarding the idea that the pre-exilic people was completely given up to idolatry, as characteristic of the later supplementers of the book, to whom he assigns this chapter. It is not necessary, however, to strike it out, even if we hold fast a genuine Jeremianic element in the passage. .Cornill'sargument for deletion is quite inadequate, and Duhm's bias against, the authenti city of passages which denounce idolatry suffers from exaggeration. But the text needs correction. - For'' provoke me not,' in which the LXX agrees with the Hebrew, we should read ' provoke not Yahweh,' tfie abbreviated form of tine Divine name being misread as the pronominal suffix. Jeremiah thus continues to speak inhis own person. Similarly at the close of the verse7 we should substt- tute for ' and I will do you no hurt ' the closing-words of 7] * to your own hurt ' (see note on that verse), i 7. The whole of the verse, with the exception of ' Yet ye.have not hearkened unto me,' should be struck out, with the LXX. The insertion of 'saith the Lord' has been occasioned by the mistaken idea that Yahweh was the speaker ; the rest of the verse is simply a variant of 6\ for which, however, .we may be grateful; since it has preserved the correct text of the- closing words ' to your own hurt.' By the aid of the LXX we have thus been enabled to restore a consistent text in which Jeremiah is the sole speaker and Yahweh is throughout referred to in the .third person. unto me : i. e. Jeremiah- 8. Such then has been the tragic history of the prophet's ministry. For three and. twenty years he has spoken, to his people the message of Yahweh, bidding them repent and turn from their evil doings and idolatrdus practices. But they have not listened to his words. What then'remains ? The day of grace is past, the invitation to return is extended no longer. Yahweh Himself now pronounces the doom ^which such obstinate disobedi- io JEREMIAH 25. .9. J thus saith the Lord of hosts : Because ye have not heard 9 my words, behold, I will send anditake all the families of the north, saith the Lord, and I will send- unto Nebui ; chadrezzar the king of Babylon, my servant, and will bring them against this land, and against the inhabitants thereof, "and7' against 'all these nations round about ; and ence has so richly merited. The foe from; the nprth, whose coming has been so long foretold,: will now come indeed, and inflict the uttermost vengeance on the rebellious nation,, in whose downfall the surrounding nations will be involved. ... 9. all the families : cf. i. 15. The LXX omits ' all 'and reads the singular (cf. v. 15, vi.sa) ;the Hebrew is preferable, since the omission of ' all ' in the Greek was probably due tp its similarity^ the following word, and the plural pronominal suffix ('them') favours a plural antecedent. On the other hand, the LXX is probably right, in omitting 'saith the Lord,' which is unnecessary in an utterance of Yahweh. -A _ . , and I will send . . . my servant. ¦ This is rightly omitted by the LXX. The Hebrew is very awkward, and the 'Subordinate position assigned to Nebuchadnezzar is hardly what we should expect. • my servant: so called as the instrument of Yahweh's ven geance, not of course as a worshipper of YahWeh. It is note worthy that the LXX omits the title when, applied to Nebuchad.- nezzar elsewhere in the book (xxvii. 6, xliii. 10), probably because the translator objected to the designation: of an idolater by so honourable a title. ;-•-.. -> • .„•./'; . • 1 v and against all these nations round about. Schwsallyj Bleeker, and Duhm strike out the whole Iclatise. But while the prophet'is naturally thinking of Judah in the first instance,. the political situation drew the surrounding peoples, with it. Jeremiah, it is true, seems, if this clause lis genuine, to trace the overthrow of these nations to the guilt of Judah. But this fs not unexampled : the storm which threatened to overwhelm Jonah, who represents Israel, and the heathen sailors in a common destruction, was due solely to Jonah's sin; and a similar attitude is observable jelse- . erre: . Jeremiah, like Other prophets, was preoccupied with the sin of his own people and its punishment ; apparently he felt no problem to be raised by the.oVerthrow of other peoples which he expected to accompany it^ We should, however, follow the LXX in omitting ' these, and read simply 'the nations round about,' especially as the only nations hitherto mentioned are 'the families of the north,' who of course are not intended. JEREMIAH 25. 10. J II I will a utterly, destroy them, and make them an astonish- ment,.rand an hissing, and perpetual desolations. More- 10 "¦ Heb. devote. I will utterly destroy them. The Hebrew means ' I will put them under the ban,' the ban being a sacred vow by which its object was devoted to utter destruction. Thus Achan brought disaster on Israel by 'a trespass in the devoted thing,' having appropriated gold, silver, and raiment from the spoil of Jericho (Joshua vii); while Saul is represented as rejected by God because he had not carried out the ban upon Amalek, but had spared Agag and the choicest of the spoil (i Sam. xv). The expression is often used with reference to the extermination of Canaanites in Deuter onomy and Joshua. It is questionable, however, whether the text is correct. The LXX reads ' I will make them desolate,' which involves the change of a single consonant. It is hot quite easy to choose between them, since, as Cornill points out, both verbs occur elsewhere in the book only In the non-jeremianic section 1, li. He prefers the LXX, on the ground that the same root frequently occurs in Jeremiah, while the root of the alternative word does not occur; desolations. The LXX reads ' reproach ' : cf. xxiii. 40, xxiv. g. In xxix. 18 the same three nouns, 'an astonishment, and an hissing, and a reproach,' are combined. It is on the whole proba ble that we should read ' reproach ' here. It is true that we might suspect assimilation to xxix. 18 ; but in view of the similarity of the two words it is unlikely that the changer is to be accounted for in this way, and it is much more likely that 'reproach' was changed into 'desolations' under the influence of {he verb ' I will make them desolate' which occurs just before (see preceding note). 10. For the former part of the verse cf.vii. 34, xvi. 9, xxxiii. 11. But here we have a significant addition. For the voice of mirth and gladness, or of the bridegroom and the bride, might be hushed when the land was still thronged with inhabitants.' The absence of joyful song and the sound of merriment would mean that a great sorrow was brooding over the people when feasting and marriage could not fitlyibe celebrated. But in times of the deepest dejection the urgent physical needs must be satisfied, the hand'-hiill must grind the daily supply of corn, the lamp must be lit as the darkness closes in. The sound of the grinding, which can be heard at a distance in the early morning, is the invariable sign of human life in the East, and even in the poorest home the lamp is indis pensable. The deathly stillness when the harsh sound of the mill no longer falls on the ear, the darkness in which no light 'glimmers from the cottage, are infallible tokens that the land has been 12 JEREMIAH 25. n. J over I will a take; from them the voice of mirth and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, the sound of the millstones, and the 1 1 light- of the candle. And -this whole land shall be a desolation, and ari astonishment; and these nations shall " Heh. cause to perish from them. , stripped of its inhabitants, It is with the instinct of genius that the poet has seized on the absence of these signs to indicate ithe fate which is to overtake Judah and the surrqunding peoples. In the-Reyelation of John the same signs are borrowed to describe the desolation of Babylon,' i.e. Rome (xviii. 22, 23). millstones. The hand-mill consisted of two stones ; the 'nether millstone' was stationary, the upper revojved upon it, being often turned by two women (Matt, xxiv.; 41, Luke xvii. 35), one of -whom fed the mill with her right hand through the hole in the upper stone. -,X)eut. xxiv. 6 .forbids the, mill or the upper millstone to be taken in pledge, 'for he taketh a man's life to pledge,' so indis pensable was it to the provision of the daily bread. The, LXX reads '.scent of myrrh.'. The word rendered 'millstones' is the dual of a word very similar to thattfor 'scent,' and.the Greek words for ' myrrh ' and ' mill ' are also very similar. The reading has no claim to be considered as original, but it apparentlyarose from both the causes mentioned, not simply from the latter. candle : rather lamp, as theR.V. usually Tenders. 11. and these nations shall serve the king- of Babylon seventy years. .This is a difficult passage. The LXX reads simply 'And they shall serve among the nations,, seventy years.' It is probable that it correctly represents the original text in its omission of 'these' and 'the king of Babylon,' also that a ^trans lation of its text gives us the original Hebrew. It is questionable, however, whether the Greek translator rightly understood it. The Hebrew verb is. used with the preposition rendered ' among ' in the sense 'to use as subjects' (literally ' to serve with":' Duhm °?mpaTS the exP-ression 'to work with cattle,' or ' work by means of ). The phrase occurs in 14, where it is rendered 'shall serve themselves of: ' cf. xxvii. 7, xxx. 8, Ezek. xxxiv. 27, inxxii. 13 to use the service of. If this sense is to be maintained here, we must take the meaning to be that the foe out of the north will enslave the nations and keep them in bondage for seventy years. Againstthis it may be urged that the natural subjectof the verb is not ' the families of the north, though with this translation they alone are suitable. Cornill argues forcibly that the LXX gives-the true meaning, and that we need not combine the verb and preposition in the sense JEREMIAH 25. 12. JS 13 serve the king of Babylon seventy years, [s] And it 1 2 1 to use as slaves,' but take the verb as used absolutely (as e. g. in ii. ao, ' I will not serve '), and the preposition as used in its local sense 'among.' We thus learn what becomes of the inhabitants who have been torn from their homes : they are doomed to slavery among the nations. "The Hebrew text may have arisen through the desire to provide the verb with a subject, other passages ' per haps co-operating (e.g. xxvii. 7), and ' the king of Babylon ' Was 1 inserted to provide the verb with an object. The prediction that the captivity would last seventy years is suspected as non-Jeremianic by many scholars, including some who regard the chapter as a whole as Jeremiah's, and admit his author ship of the similar prediction in xxix. 10. '- It is remarkable that the latter passage was written several years later, in the reign of Zedekiah, and that the same number is mentioned there as here. But we need not be disturbed by this discrepancy, unless we insist that the number was meant to be taken literally. More probably we must regard it as a round number, just as the same period is described in xxvii. 7 as embracing the reigns of Nebuchadnezzar 'and his son, and his son's son.' Duhm considers that the author took it from Zech. i. 12, 'how long wilt thou not have mercy on Jerusalem and on the cities of Judah, against which thou hast had indignation these threescore and ten years?' (cf. vii. 5). But it is more likely that Zechariah's reference to the seventy years was occa sioned by his acquaintance with Jeremiah's prophecy. The angel of Yahweh enforces his plea by the reminder that the seventy years which had been laid down in prophecy as the period of Jerusalem's humiliation had now expired. In any case the actual duration of the captivity was less than seventy years, if we assume that the first return of jews took place in 536 B.C. Nor did the Babylonian supremacy last quite seventy years. Had the representation of the subjection to Babylon as lasting seventy years originated in the post-exilic period, we should have expected a closer agreement with history. At the same time it is not unlikely that the clause did not originally belong to this context, if the reconstruction of the original close of the oracle suggested in the next note is correct. , , . 12-14. This passage is regarded by many scholars as a later insertion, and was so treated even by Graf (along with n") and by Hitzig (except for 14"), who had been preceded by not a few critics, while others rejected only 13. ©relh still substantially defends their authenticity, apart from 13". A prophecy of Baby lon's overthrow is not in place here. It is true that it does not link on badly to nb, which, while it predicts a long captivity, sueeests that a turn of fortune, such as the overthrow of Babylon, is to come at the end of seventv years. But it disastrously disturbs 14 JEREMIAH 25. 12. S shall come to pass, when seventy years are accomplished, the connexion with 15 ff., which, introduced as it is by For, must follow immediately on a prophecy of the overthrow of Judah and the surrounding peoples. Moreover, 13 in its present form is exposed to additional objections. It is quite unexampled for the prophet in the course of his prophecy to refer to himself in the third person, and the language implies that a book of prophecies containing the oracle on Babylon, presumably 1— li- 58, lay before the writer. But this oracle on Babylon is not from the pen of Jere miah, and even li. 59 ff. contains a narrative from the time of Zedekiah, whereas our chapter belongs to the reign of Jehoiakim. As a whole then 12-14 must be regarded as a later insertion.' But the question must still be raised whether the whole passage needs to be struck out. While some scholars treat 13 as itself an inser tion within an insertion, Schwally and Cornill have argued that part of it belongs to the original structure, to which it is also referred by Rothstein. It is obvious that the closing words, with their reference to Jeremiah in the third person, cannot be part of the prophecy. But the LXX is probably correct in taking them as the title of the prophecies against the foreign nations (xlvi-li), which once stood here in the Hebrew text as they do now in the LXX. If we take out the words 'What Jeremiah prophesied concerning the nations' (omitting 'all,' with the LXX), the rest of the verse might belong to Jeremiah's prophecy if we supposed the original reference in ' that land ' to have been to Judah rather than to Babylon. In this case the ' book ' will presumably be the book in which Jeremiah had collected his prophecies during the three and twenty years of his ministry, i. e. the roll written at his dictation by Baruch and burnt by Jehoiakim. We may thus assume that in its original form this section of the chapter closed with na, I3lb : 'And this whole land shall be a desolation, and an astonishment ; and I will bring upon this land all my words which I have pronounced against it, even all that is written in this ' book.' We have thus a conclusion which better corresponds to the beginning, in which Jeremiah speaks of the words he has for so long been proclaiming to his people. And the vision of the wine-cup links well to the passage in this restored form. 12. The verse should run in the briefer form presupposed by the LXX, ' And it shall come to pass, when seventy years are accomplished, that I will punish (Heb. visit) that nation ; and I will make it desolate for ever.' The verse is based on xxix. 10 where Yahweh promises to ' visit ' His people, i.e. in mercy. The author of this verse keeps the same word, but uses it in the sense to 'punish.' The expression 'desolate for ever' is literally _« perpetual desolations;' it comes apparently from the oracle on jr^O£MiAH 25. 13-15. SJRSJ 15 that I will punish the king of Babylon, and that nation, saith the Lord, for their iniquity, and the land of the Chaldeans ; and I will make it a desolate for ever. [ j] And 13 I will bring upon that land all my words which I have pronounced against it, even all that is written in this book, [K] which Jeremiah hath prophesied against all the nations, [s] For many nations and great kings b shall serve 14 themselves of them, even of them : and I will recom pense them according to their deeds, and according to the work of their hands. [j] For thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, unto me : '5 * Heb. everlasting desolations. b Or, have served themselves or, made bondmen Babylon,. li 26,62: cf. xlix. 33, Ezek. xxxv. 9 (from which it may have been originally derived.). 13. See note on 12-14. 14. Since the closing words of 13 constitute in the LXX a title to xlvi-K, which immediately follows, there is no place for 14 and it is omitted. But inasmuch as the oracles against the foreign nations once stood in the same position in the Hebrew text, we may infer that 14 and 12, which is inseparably connected with it, were introduced into the Hebrew text after xlvi-li had been removed to the end of the book. 14* is derived from xxvii.. 7s. Hitzig took i4b to be the continuation of 11% but Graf pointed out in reply that the expressions in it seemed to be borrowed fromx the oracle on Babylon, 1. 29, li. 24 : cf. 1. 15, li. 6, 56. serve themselves of them. This expression occurs in xxii. 13, where it is rendered ' to use the service of ; ' it means here to employ them as slaves : so xxvii. 11, xxx. 8. See note on n. 15. We now come to the striking vision of the wine-cup of Yahweh's fury, which is linked closely to the preceding section by ' For ' (naturally omitted by the LXX). Duhm recognizes that the conception itself is worthy of a Jeremiah, and that the passage itself would be if the author's gift of expression had been on a level with the conception. This objection may perhaps be met by the elimination of insertions ; Duhm's further objection that the conception itself cannot be Jeremiah's, since he was no prophet to the nations, has been sufficiently dealt with already (see vol. i, pp. 77j 78). The giving of the draught to the nations can be thought of only as a transaction in the mind of the prophet, since an actual visit to the nations is out of the question, and like the 16 JEREMIAH 25. 16-18V JJS Take- the cup of the wine of this fury at my hand, and cause all the nations, to whom I send thee, to drink it. 16 And they shall drink, and reel to and fro, and be mad, because of the sword, that I will send among them. 1? Then took I the cup at the Lord's hand, arid made all the nations to drink, unto whom the Lord had sent me : 18 [JS] fount, Jerusalem, and the citiesof Judah, and the kings view that he gave the wine to °,n.account of its association with Tyre w™ v'„ f theT^°TeM^an colpniesin.fte Mediterranean lea and™ its Coasts. The' LXX reads simply ' the kings.beyond the m^%ZT" and.,Teraa.wfe North-Arabian tribes, which are "so refold tolfllUrS-m *"¦**•& **., The fete>, Which is aTcoStn r^nJ I I9'ZhTereit is C0UPIed with Sheba, is apcordirfg to Gen. xxv. 15 im Ishmaelite clan. Its home was Sh^ma"11 Dedans *? °f ^ *"« * *^e MentEd which itis elsewhere associated (Ezek xxxviifrT as a1Sto£ people of Cushite stock. It is referred to as a trading peo^e fa a son of Aran* These data point to ^ha^sl^me'tf JEREMIAH 25. 24, 25. JSS 19. me corners of their hair polled ; [S] and all the kings of 24 Arabia, and all the kings of the mingled people that dwell in the wilderness j and all the kings of Zimri, and all 25 both. But other data connect Uz with Edom (especially Gen. xxxvi. 28, Lam. iv. ai, and the fact that Job's friend Eliphaz was a Temanite), and the present verse strongly favours a similar situation for Buz, to which Elihu belonged (Job xxxii. a). On the -whole question see the note on Job i. 1. For the 'corner- clipped ' people see on ix. 26. 24. In the unpointed Hebrew text 'and all the kings of Arabia ' is identical with ' and all the kings of the mingled people,' so that of the two clauses one should be struck out as due to mistaken repetition. The LXX read only one, taking it in the sense of the latter. ' The mingled people ' is a term difficult to interpret in this connexion ; on the analogy of 20 it should mean people of foreign stock Who lived among the tribes just mentioned. But we should adopt the other clause, reading the verse ' And all the kings of Arab that dwell in the wilderness.' The rendering ' Arabia ': is unfortunate, since all that is covered by the term here is one or more tribes in North Arabia. It never in the O.T. means Arabia in our sense of the term. We may perhaps illustrate this passage from Isa. xxi. 13, but it is dubious whether the word there is aiproper name. The whole verse , is treated as an insertion by Cornill ; Giesebrecht retains ' and the Arabs who dwell in the wilderness.' f-x- 25, 26. The rest of the description is struck out by Giesebrecht and Cornill, not merely on ' account '-of the formula 'and all the kings Of,' but to some extent on the LXX evidence, and largely on tbe ground of contents. The wider and wider sweep of the enumeration stamps the verses as coloured by the later eschatology. and all the kings of Zimri. This is absent in the LXX. Zimri is quite unknown ; it has commonly been identified with Zimran, the son of Abraham and Keturah (Gen. xxv. s)i But this is very dubious, nor do the cuneiform inscription's give us any trustworthy information. Curiously it is marked as east of the Tigris on the marp of Syria,- Assyria, and Babylonia in. the Ene. Bib., and on the map of Mesopotamia. Duhm makes the interesting suggestion that the word may be a cypher for a name at which the writer only dared to hint, such as 'Romans,' which has the same numerical value. This, however, wouldamply a very late date for the insertion, and although we have a cypher in the next verse, itis not natural to look -for one here. If the.text is correct, we must resign ourselves to ignorance.: Gomer (Ezek. xxxviii. 6) would be an easy emendation, but it is doubtful whether it would be .suitable here^ in spite of the eschatological hue of the passage. C 2 20 JEREMIAH 25. 26. S 26 the kings of Elam, and all the kings of the Medes ; and all the kings of the north, far and near, one with another j "and all the kingdoms of the world, which are upon, the face of the earth : and the king of a Sheshach shall drink " According to ancient tradition, a cypher for Babel. See ch. li. 41. Since this note was written the editor has seen that Rost and Peiser had previously, suggested the same emendation in the form. ' Gomeri ' or ' Gimirri.' , Elam: see on xlix. 34. It lay beyond the Tigris, east, of Babylonia, south of Assyria and Media, and reaching to, the Persian Gulf on the south. Its combination with Media here is interesting in the light of Isa. xxi. 2, which was probably written shortly before the capture of Babylon by Cyrus. Cf. also Isa. xxii. 6. all the kings of the north. This is not a very suitable addition, since the ' families of the north ' are those who are the agents of Divine vengeance, but it is accounted for by the eschatological interest, which is still more evident in the following, clause in which a universal judgement is announced, whereas a selection of nations is implied in the prophet's commission : * the nations to whom I send thee' (15, cf. 17). one with another. The words may be taken with ' far and near ' to mean whether they are near to or far .from one another, or they may mean one after another. of the world. The LXX omits this. It is not onlyunneces- sary but ungrammatical in the Hebrew. :; and the king of Sheshach shall drink after them, Sheshach isa secret mode of writing Babel : cf. li. 41. The cypher employed here and in li. 1, 41 is known as, Atbdsh, since the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet was interchanged with the first, the last but one with the second.-the last but two with the third, and so on. When thus interpreted Sheshach is read Babel. It is employed here either because at the time this verse was inserted it was dangerous to speak of the fall of Babylon in plain language, or because the writer had the apacahrptic fondness for mysterious designations. In view Of the freedom with which Babylon is' meKiTonedMn prophecies of its downfall towards the close of the exile, and especially of the use of Babel in the same breath with Sheshach in li. 41, the former motive seems not to have operated.. We may accordingly assume that it was chosen under the latter impulse, but also because the name contained in itself a congenial sugges tion. To the Hebrew ear the name would suggest ' humiliation.' The clause cannot well have belonged to Jeremiah's orieinal prophecy, though it may be granted that some of the objections which may be urged against ia, 14 are not applicable here, and it JEREMIAH 25. 27, 28. S 21 after them. And thou "shalt say unto them, Thus saith 27 the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel : Drink ye, and be drunken, and spue, and fall, and rise no more, because of the sword which I will send among you. And it shall 28 be, if they refuseto take the cup at thine hand to drink, then shalt thou say unto them, Thus saith the Lord of is by no means incredible that Jeremiah, who anticipated a restoration for his people after seventy years, should have appended a prophecy of Babylon's overthrow. It is not likely, however, that he would have done so at the time When the prophecy was first written, or on its republication after the des truction of the roll. It is, moreover, probable that the clause was not written by, Jeremiah at all. The objection that after the enumeration of the lands which have to drink the cup has been closed by the general statements in the earlier part of the verse, it is unfitting that a definite kingdom should be mentioned, is of little moment. For it lies in the nature of the case that if Babylon is the instrument of this universal judgement, the king of Babylon must be the last to drink ; and it is the very opposite of unfitting that he should be definitely mentioned at the close, corresponding to Pharaoh at the beginning of the list. And this argument has no weight if we have already denied to Jeremiah the rest of the verse. All we could infer from it, if it were sound, would be that the last clause of 26 was not from the same hand as the rest of the verse ; but unless we claim the earlier part of the verse for Jere miah, it has no bearing on the Jeremianic origin of its conclusion. Nevertheless this is rendered improbable by its absence from the LXX, by the connexion of the passage with 1— Ii, and by the use of a cypher which smacks of apocalyptic rather than prophecy, and is unexampled in Jeremiah's genuine writings. How old the Atbash cypher is we do not know. 27-29. It is surprising, after we have learnt in 17 that the prophet had made all the nations drink to whom Yahweh had sent him, to find the drinking regarded as something still lying in the future, which the nations may try to resist. Moreover from 17 onwards Jeremiah is the speaker, while here it is Yahweh, though no indication of the change is given. It would largely meet these difficulties if we could transpose these verses and bring them into connexion with 15, 16. And the points of contact between 16 and 27 may seem to favour this. We must not press the ' unaesthetic description ' in 27 against Jeremianic authorship, in view of such passages as Isa. xxviii. 8, Hos. vii. 5, to say nothing of 2 Pet. ii. 3, and the caution we need constantly to bear in mind that we must not apply our canons of taste to ancient authors. But 28, 29 can 22 JEREMIAH : 25. ao, 36. '> 3 29 hosts': Ye shall surely drink". For, lo, I begin to work evil at the city which is called by my name, and should ye be utterly unpunished ? Ye shall'not be unpunished : for I will call for a sword upon all the /inhabitants of the 30 earth, saith the Lord of hosts. Therefore prophesy:thou hardly be from the pen of Jeremiah. The thought that the nations might refuse, to drink is.in itself strange, in view of the visionary character of the experience. We (have at the close of 29 the same universal scope .of the judgement which we have met with in 26. But even more incompatible with Jeremiah's attitude is the point of view from which 29 is written. Is' it credible that the prophet, who proclaims with such tremendous energy the inexcusable character of Judah's sin, and represents it as unparal leled among the heathen (ii. 10, 11), should have said that since Judah was punished, the nations should not escape ? The language suggests, if it does^not imply, a favouritism towards Israel which the pre-exilic prophets' from Amos onwards earnestly oppose. It is written rather from the standpoint represented by the Second faaiah, from which Judah was regarded as relatively innocent in contrast with the heathen, though the great prophet of the exile drew a different inference. He says that the sufferings of the comparatively innocent' Israel are vicariously borne to atone for the guilt of the heathen; The author of 28, 29 regards . it. as intolerable that Judah should suffer alone ; if Judah is punished, a fottiori the rest of the world., In xlix. 12 the thought recurs in a form still more extreme. But 128, 29 cannot stand alone, they need 27. Verses 27-29, however, cannot very well be thrust in before 17 ff, and the last clause of 27 is as inconsistent with Jere miah's authorship in this verse as in 16. Accordingly it is best to regard 27.-29 as a later insertion unskilfully made at an inappro priate point. ,-, ,, r 29. which is called by my name : see vii. 10. : 30-38. A more poetical style is here resumed,, but grave doubts may be urged against Jeremiah's authorship of the passage. It is very imitative in character, and the eschatological tendency is very pronounced. 30. The opening of the poem seems to have been imitated from Amos i. 2, ' Yahweh shall roar from Zion, and utter his voice from Jerusalem' (cf. Joel iii. 16). Amos continues, ' and the pastures of the shepherds shall mourn, and the top of Carmel shall wither.' This may have suggested the : word rendered 'fold ' (marg 'pas ture') and the mention of the ' shepherds ' later in the passage. Here, however, Yahweh utters His lion-like roar 'from on hie* ' •from His holy habitation,' i. e. from His heavenly temple He JEREMIAH 25. 31, 32, S 23 against them all these words, and say unto them, The Lord shall roar from on high, and utter his tvoice from ' his holy habitation; he shall . mightily roar against his "fold; he shall give a shout, as they that tread the grapes,, against all the inhabitants of the earth. A noise 31 shall come even to the end of the earth ; for the Lord hath a controversy with the nations, he will plead with all flesh ; as for the wicked, he will give them to the sword, saith the Lord. Thus saith the L6ed of hosts, Behold, evil shall go 3a * Or, 'pasture > thunders against His pasture or homestead, i. e. the land of Judah, where- His flock is feeding. In the latter part of the verse the figure changes and the judgement embraces all the earth. Instead of; the lion roaring .against the homestead, we have the vintage shout of the grape traders. The word rendered ' shout ' which bears this particular application is used similarly in the oracle on Moab, Isa. xvi. 10, and in its expansion Jer. xlviii. 33. Here itjsa vintage shout, but Yahweh is treading human grapes, and the wine is the blood of men, as in Lam. i. 151 and the powerful but terrible description of the judgement on Edom in lea. lxiii. 1-6. See further on xlviii. 33. According to" the present text, it is all the inhabitants of the earth that are in Yahweh's winepress, but Duhm may be right in regardingcthiselausepwhich has no parallel line, as an insertion. In any case the: universal scope of the judgement is attested by what follows. ; . : '¦ 31. Cf. Isa.iii. 13, 14. The noise is apparently the crash of battle which resounds to the .ends of the/earth. The last clause does not mean that the wicked among the heathen are to be given to the sword, for : the judgement falls on -the heathen a& such. Judah is involvedia the catastrophe, but possibly the writer may intend to suggest that righteous' Jews will not be slain. For ' plead ' we should substitute ' contend ' (see ii. 9). 32. The latter part of the verse is taken.from vi. as, but ' tem pest Ms substituted for f nation:? cf. xxiii. 19, xxx. 23.! :Duhm thinks the meaning is that at the instigation of. Yahweh one people falls on another, till all are destroyed.1 But perhaps the Words mean no more than that the storm of judgement strikes one nation after another. The instrument of judgement is a foe from the uttermost parts of the earth, a phrase whjch probably bears a different sense here than in vi. 23, the author's geographical hori zon being more remote. He has no definite people lin his mind, 24 JEREMIAH 25. 33-35- S forth from nation to nation, and a great tempest shall be 33 raided up from the uttermost parts of the earth. -And the slain of the Lord shall be at that day from one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth :. they shall not ; be lamented; neither gathered, nor buried,; they 31 shall: be dung upon the face of the ground. Howl, ye .shepherds;, and cry; and wallow yourselves in ashes, ye principal of the flock : for the days of your slaughter are fully come, aand I will break you in pieces, and ye -shall 35 fall like a pleasant vessel. [ And bfhe shepherds shall 11 Or, and I will disperse you Many ancient versions read, and your dispersions, b Heb. flight shall perish from the shepherds, and escape from cW. but it was natural to suppose that the unknown races which dwelt on the earth's rim might play the part the Scythians were expected in earlier periods to play. , 33. In ' that day,' the apocalyptic Day of the Lord,' ' the slain of Yahweh ' (Isa. lxvi. 16) will lie strewn on the ground, right across the world; none will survive to utter the lamentation, to perform the last offices. 34. The 'shepherds' are, as often elsewhere, the rulers; the ' principal :of the flock' are their, chief subjects. wallow yourselves: cf. vi. 26. and I will break you in pieces. The form in the text is anomalous, and the versions .give no satisfactory sense. Probably ' to break in pieces.' is the sense intended rather than ' to scatter,' which is unsuitable to the context, while the alternative sense does suit the reference to the pleasant vessel.,' Since the latter^ however, is due. to a textual corruption (see next note), we should probably strike out the word, which is not read by the LXX. :; a pleasant vessel. The shattering of a costly vessel is in itself a.very appropriate metaphor, but it can hardly be correct here, since it introduces an incongruous element, and fthis applies also to Graetz's emendation ' a vessel, of clay ' (cf. xviii, xiii. 13 14). The passage throughout employs the metaphor of a' flock and its shepherds, and . the LXX reads . ' rams ' instead of » vessel ' Two easy emendations of the Hebrew would be possible on this basis, but it would be better to read With. Duhm 'rams of slaugh ter.' ^ He compares 'flock of slaughter,' Zech. xi. 4l 7, all the more that he thinks this portion of Zechariah served the author as a model in other respects. 36. Based on Amos ii. 14. JEREMIAH 25. 36— 26. 1. SB 25 have no way to flee, nor the principal of the flock to escape. A voice of the cry of the shepherds, and the 3<> howling of the principal of the flock ! for the Lord layeth waste their pasture. And the peaceable folds are 37 brought to silence because of the fierce anger of the Lord. He hath forsaken his covert, as the lion : ,for 38 their land is become an astonishment because of athe fierceness of the oppressing sword, and because Of his fierce anger. [B] In the beginning of tbe reign of Jehoiakim the son 26 ¦ 't'Or, according to some ancient authorities, the oppressing sword See ch. xlyi. 16. 36. Cf. Zech. xi. 3. 38. The text seems to mean either that Yahweh has been forced by the devastation of Judah to abandon His land, just as the lion is forced by the destruction of his lair, or that He has left His ' holy habitation ' to lay waste the earth, as a lion leaves his lair to attack the flock. But the thought is in either case very imperfectly expressed, and we should, with most recent commentators, strike out the particle of comparison and read ' the lion leaves his covert* or 'lions leave their covert,' i.e. the lions are forced out of their lairs by the destruction of the jungle : cf. Zech. xi. 3. the fierceness of the oppressing sword. The Hebrew is incorrect The margin gives the true reading, which is that of the LXX and Targum and some Hebrew MSS., is attested by xlvi. 16, 1. 16, and involves a very slight change in the Hebrew. and because of his fierce anger. This clause is omitted in the LXX, but is required by the parallelism. The pronoun has, it is true, no antecedent ; perhaps none was felt to be needed ; but the defect is readily remedied if we read * the fierce anger of Yahweh,' as in 37, which with the abbreviated form of the Divine name would be very like the present text. xxvi. Jeremiah, at Grave Risk op his Life, Threatens THAT THE TEMPLE WILL BE DESTROYED. With this chapter we begin a series of extracts from the biography of Jeremiah, which we may with confidence assign to Baruch, and which with some interruptions extend to xlv. This is not to say that the biography has not been used for earlier sections of the book, but from this point it is the leading source. 26 JEREMIAH' 26. i. B of Josiah, king of Judah, came this word from the Lord, The narrative in the present chapter refers, as most critics: reeog^ nize, to the same occasion as that on which the address recorded in vii was delivered. Both contain the emphatic declaration thai unless the people amend their ways Yahweh wilt make the Temple like Shjlob, and both represent the address as delivered to "all Judah at the Temple itself. While vii reproduces the address itself, xxvi is mainly occupied with the circumstances in' Which it was delivered, especially ifs sequel. It is off great importance, for the light it throws on the prophet's fidelity to his mission, which led him to face the extreme consequences, and on the attitude to the temple which characterized the official and popular religion of thetime. The chronological note' at the beginning is" valuable, in view of the weighty character of the address. There is no occasion to doubt its accuracy, according to which. we should date the event in 608 B.C. or thereabouts. Duhm thinks of Jehoiakim's coronation. At that time the crisis was over. Josiah, it is" true, was dead, Jehoahaz dethroned, the suzerainty of, Egypt established, Yet the State remained, the dynasty of David hel35he throne, the people were still suffered to dwell in thejr.own cpurftry anrf their own homes. The Temple stood, tHey could still look at it as a fetish guaranteeing their security (vii. 4), and declare thaj: they were delivered (vii. 10). A somewhat later date, however, would also'' fit these conditions. The coronation day would, not be the time most appropriate for such an address, and had it been delivered then, we might have expected Baruqh, to mention it explicitly., xxvi. 1-6. Yahweh bidst the -prophet stand in the Temple court and proclaim to Judah His word, since repentance may avert the punishment He purposes-to inflict. : He is to tell them that unless they hearken, to His word, He will make.the Temple like Shneh; and Jerusalem a curse to all nations. :'¦ -" — 7-9. When Jeremiah had delivered his message, the priests and prophets threatened him with death for proclaiming the destruction of the Temple and city., 10-15. ; The priests and prophets accuse Jeremiah to the princes and people as worthy of death for prophesying against Jerusalem. Jeremiah replies that Yahweh has bidden him speak, all these words; He exhorts them to amend their life, in which case Yahweh will repent of the evil He has spoken. As for himself, they must act as they think well ; only if they kill him they will bring innocent blood on themselves and the city, since all' he has spoken he has been commanded by Yahweh to speak. -16-19. The princes and the people decide that Jeremiah is not worthy of death, since he has spoken in Yahweh's name. Some JEREMIAH 26. 2, 3. B 27 saying, Thus saith the Lord: Stand in the court of the a Lord's house, and speak unto all the cities of Judah, which come to worship in the Lord's house, all the words that I command thee to speak unto them ', keep not back a word. It may be they will hearken, arid turn every 3 of the elders remind the people that Micah had foretold . the destruction of the city and Temple. But Hezekiah, so far from putting him to death, besbught Yahweh's mercy and the -punish ment was averted. .,- 30-24, Uriah similarly prophesied against Jerusalem and Judah. Jehoiakim sought to kill him, but he escaped into Egypt. Thereupon Jehoiakim sent to Egypt to ifeteh him, and When he was brought baGk killed him. Ahikam, however, protected Jeremiah, so that he was not put to death. 1. It is characteristic of Baruch to insert dates at the beginning of his narratives, so that we are far better informed with reference to the time at which many of the events occurred than with reference to the dates at which several of the discourses were uttered. ' 1. came this word. The Syriac adds ' to Jeremiah.' The LXX agrees with the Hebrew in omitting it, and its insertion by the Syriac is easy to account for, since the passage is abrupt without it; but this very abruptness is itself a reason for regarding the words as original, and their omission as due to accident. ' 2. the court of the LOED'S house: cf. xix. 14. unto all the cities of Judah. We should probably strike out * the cities of,* With the LXX ; it Seems to be a reminiscence of xi. 6. In vii. a we have ! Hear the word of Yahweh, all Judah.' The occasion was apparently a festival when the people from the country districts and other towns of Judah came up to Jerusalem and assembled at the Temple. To the people, thus trusting, in spite of their recent disasters,' in the Temple as the guarantee of Yahweh's presence and protection, the prophet is sent with his unwelcome message. -keep not back a word. As the sequel showed, the message was one which, the' prophet could deliver only at the risk of his life. He was therefore exposed to the temptation of modifying or omitting the sterner' portions of it; Accordingly in this instance the warning is repeated, which he had received as a general instruction at the outset of his ministry, ' speak unto theto all that I;eotnmand'thee' (i. 17). For the expression here (literally as A.V. ' diminish not a-Word ') cf. Deut. iv; 2, xii. 32. ' ¦ 3. turn every man from his evil way.' Observe' the individu alizing form of the expression. 28 JEREMIAH 26. 4-6. B man from his evil way ; that I may repent me of the evil^ which I purpose to do unto them because of the evil of 4 their doings. And thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the Lord : If ye will not hearken to me, to walk in 5 my law, which I have, set before you, to hearken to the words of my servants the prophets, whom I send unto you, even rising up early and sending them, but ye. have 6 not hearkened ; then will I make this house like Shiloh, that X may repent me. Even noW repentance and reform may avert the meditated judgement. For the principle cf. xviii. 8, and its most beautiful expression in the Book of Jonah. Ezekiel applies it to the individual (Ezek. xviii. 21-23, 27, 28, xxxiii. n- 20). The anthropomorphic assertion of God's repentance is not uncommon in the Old Testament from Gen. vi. 6 onwards. 4-6. Duhm says that Baruch could not have written a single word of these verses. The reason seems to be that Jeremiah could not have made the deliverance of the people dependent on obedience to the Law, in view of what he says in viii. 8, 9, and Baruch also must have known that the audience, and the priests and prophets in particular, were the most zealous adherents of the Law. It may be granted that at the beginning of Jehoiakim's reign Jeremiah would probably not have regarded, an adhesion to Deuteronomy as completely satisfying, his religiousideal. He had, we may well believe, been disillusioned as to the value of the Reformation. Yet the religious and moral requirements of Deuteroriomy as distinguished from the ritual regulations must have still seemed to him largely valid, and if we can trust, as in the present writer's judgement we confidently may, the report, of the address in vii, we have there a catalogue of the sins of Judah, which obedience to the Deuteronomic Law would have brought to an end. We may then regard the words as quite genuine, even on the assumption that 'my law' refers to the Book of the Law on which the Reformation was based. But this interpretation may not be necessary. The parallel clause, ' to hearken to the words of my servants the prophets,' probably provides us with the true explanation, so that we should take the word rendered ' law '. in the earner,non-technical sense of instruction, as in Isa. i. 10, where 'the word of Yahweh' is parallel to ' the instruction of our God,' and the reference is to the prophetic utterance which follows. 5. rising up early and sending: cf. vii. 13, and elsewhere. 6. like Shiloh : see vii. 12-14. JEREMIAH 26. 7, 8. B 29 and will make this city a curse to all the nations of the earth. And the priests and the prophets and all 7 the people heard Jeremiah speaking these words in the house of the Lord. And it came to pass, when 8 a curse to all the nations. The meaning is not, -of course, that the ruined city will prove a curse to the nations, but that it will furnish them with so telling an example of utter destruction that they will employ it in their imprecations of disaster- on their enemies, invoking on them a destruction similar to that which had befallen Jerusalem. This forms a contrast to the promise, ' In thee shall all the families of the earth bless themselves' (Gen. xii. 3 : cf. xxii. 18), which means that in their invocations of blessing upon themselves the nations will utter the wish that they may be as blessed as Abraham (cf. iv. 2). 7. Jeremiah had taken up a position in which the whole of those who had gathered for the assembly at the Temple could hear his words. This audience included, in addition to the great body of the people, the official representatives of religion, the priests and prophets, but not the princes (see 10). 8. Jeremiah was heard without interruption to the end. This would be due not so much to the reverence in which the people held him, as to the fact that their dearest prejudices were not violated apparently till the close of the address. ' Denunciation of sin and threat of punishment were quite in order ; Jeremiah was following here the path already taken by his predecessors and him self. To predict the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem was to touch the susceptibilities of the people in the tenderest point : cf. vii. 4. That it was bitterly resented by priests and prophets goes without saying; to them it would seem to be blasphemy, the penalty for which was death : cf. the case of Stephen (Aetsvi,, vii). The statement that ' all the people ' joined the priests and prophets in the arrest of Jeremiah and threat of the death-penalty creates a difficulty. According to 11, the priests and prophets alone lay the charge against him, and the people are coupled with the princes as those before whom the accusation is brought; and similarly in 12-15 Jeremiah treats the people as judges rather than accusers. In 16 they unite with the princes in giving a verdict of acquittal; If the words ' and all the people * belong to the original text, we must suppose that they are' not to be literally taken,- and that while the multitude or a section of it assailed the prophet, he sub sequently won them over to his side. This would harmonize with the well-known fickleness of the crowd, which is peculiarly sus ceptible to suggestion, and with the: fact that in 24 it-is said that Ahikam protected Jeremiah so that he was not given 'into the 30 JEREMIAH 26. 9-11. B Jeremiah had made an end of speaking all that .the , Lord had commanded him to speak unto all the people, that -the priests and., the prophets arid all the people 9 laid hold on him, saying, Thou sha/lt surely die. Why hast thou prophesied in the name of the LoRrvsaying, This house shall be like Shiloh, and this dach (Hi. 31 = 2 Kings xxv. 27) with the narrative of Belshazzar's overthrow. It had the advantage of substituting a vaguer definition of the period than the inexact seventy years which is found in the parallel passages. serve themselves of him. See notes on xxv. 11, 14. 44 JEREMIAH 27. 8-12. S BS 8 selves of him. [BS] And it shall come to pass, that the nation and the kingdom which will not serve the same Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, and that, will not put their neck . under the yoke of the king of Babylon, that nation will I punish, saith the Lord, with the sword, and with the , famine, and with the pestilence, until I have 9 consumed themiby his hand. But as for you, hearken ye not to your prophets, nor to your diviners, nor to your dreams, nor to your soothsayers, nor to your sorcerers, which speak unto you, saying, Ye shall not serve the king of 10 Babylon : for they prophesy a lie unto you, to remove you far from your land ; and that I should drive you out and ye 1 « should perish. But the nation that shall bring their neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon, and serve him, that nation will I let remain in their own land, saith the Lord ; and they shall till it, and dwell therein. 12 And I spake to Zedekiah king of Judah according to 8 continues 6, or perhaps better 6a, will not serve . . . and that : to be omitted, with the LXX. consumed them by. The Hebrew is very questionable : we should probably read ' given them into,' changing one letter. 9. The five kingsare warned not to trust their own optimistic fore tellers of the future. Five classes are enumerated (for 'dreams' we should probably read ' dreamers ' with several versions), but whether the writer intended us to discriminate sharply between them is uncertain. We may have merely a rhetorical accumula tion of terms, as if he would say, Try all types of those who profess to foretell the future ; they will all prophesy smooth things, for the heathen have only false prophets, but do not believe them or you will be ruined. Cf. the false prophets confronted by Micaiah, 1 Kings xxii. 5-38. 10. to remove you. Certainly it was not the intention of these prophets to secure the exile of their nation, in which they would be involved, with all the additional odium attached to discredited advisers, but if they had deliberately contemplated such an issue they could not have given advice more calculated to reach it. and that . . . perish. This clause is absent in the LXX, and has probably been introduced from 15. 12.1 spake. The first person is surprising both here and in 16, JEREMIAH 27. 13-16. BS 45 all these words, saying, Bring your necks under the yoke of the king of Babylon, and serve him and his people, and live. Why will ye die, thou and thy people, by the sword, 13 by the famine, and by the pestilence, as the Lord hath spoken concerning the nation that will not serve the king of Babylon? And hearken not unto the words of the 14 prophets that speak unto you, saying, Ye shall not serve the king of Babylon : for they prophesy a lie unto you. For I have not sent them, saith the Lord, but they 15 prophesy falsely in my name; that I might drive you out, and that ye might perish, ye, and the prophets that prophesy unto you. Also I spake to the priests and to 16 since in the preceding verses Yahweh is the speaker and Jeremiah the recipient of the message. Possibly the meaning may be that Jeremiah's message to the kings stillcontinues to the effect that he had given the same counsel to Zedekiah, the priests and the peo ple, as he is giving to them (so Stade). But such awkwardness of expression would stamp the passage as secondary. It would be simpler to read here and in 16 ' said Jeremiah,' with Giesebrecht (see note on 2), or ' And thou shalt speak.' Bring1 your necks. The counsel is formally addressed to the king only, but his action involves that of many more, hence the plural. After these words the LXX omits the rest" of this verse, the whole of 13, and 14" (as far as ' saying '). Duhm prefers this, and carries this preference to the logical conclusion of striking out the last clause of 14 and the whole of 15. But it is more probable that the Hebrew is correct, since the bare phrase 'bring your necks' is an otherwise unexampled expression. The Greek rendering is due to an oversight of the translator or a scribe, whose eye passed from 'serve' in 12 to ' serve ' in 14. He also omitted ' under the yoke of the king of Babylon,' because through this oversight the king of Babylon was mentioned in two consecu tive clauses. 16-22. In these verses there is an astonishing divergence be tween the Hebrew and the Septuagint, the latter containing about a quarter only of the former. Verse 17 is omitted, similarly i8b, while for 10-22 the LXX reads simply : ' For thus saith the Lord, And as for the residue of the vessels which the king of Babylon took not, when he carried away Jeconiah from Jerusalem, they shall be carried to Babylon, saith the Lord.' The main difference between the two texts is that the LXX simply predicts that the vessels still 46 JEREMIAH 27. 16. BS all this; people, saying, Thus, saith the Lord,:,. Hearken left in Jerusalem will be taken to Babylon, while the Hebrew adds the prediction that eventually ,they will fee, brought back again. A good many scholars prefer the LXX. ' And it is undeniable that stylistically it is much superiory and that we may well suspect that the hand of a diffuse supplementer has here, as so often elsewhere, expanded the original text. Verse 17 interrupts the connexion be tween 16 and 18, which refer to the Temple vessels, with an in appropriate reiteration of the theme of the earlier part of the chap ter. It should probably be omitted. Verse i8b (' that the vessels ... to Babylon ') is not indispensable, but its omission makes the sentence abrupt and ambiguous,, since the content of the interces sion might either be that the vessels should be brought back or that the vessels which remained should not be taken away. Accordingly the Hebrew is here to be preferred ; the eye of the scribe or trans lator apparently passed from hi to ki (19). The enumeration of the vessels that were left behind would have been unnecessary for Jeremiah's contemporaries, andmay have been added from 2 Kings xxv. 13 ff. The omission in the LXX of any prediction that the vessels would be brought back might be due to the fact that those specially enumerated in 19 were not restored, since the Babylon ians had broken them up for convenience of transport (2 Kings xxv. 13). But in favour of the LXX it may be urged that this prediction of restoration is hardlyjikely to have been made in the same breath as the threat that the vessels would be carried away, whereas the supplemented loved such modifications ; the expres sion ' the day that I visit them ' is very strange when applied to inanimate objects ; and the insertion of the clause may be du.e to the account of the restoration of the vessels given in Ezra i. 7-n. In this passage the vessels restored are simply defined as those 'which Nebuchadnezzar had brought forth out of Jerusalem.' Apparently this covers both those taken away when Jehoiaehhi was deported to Babylon,, and those taken when the city was destroyed. It seems best then to regard the prediction of restoration as a later insertion in the Hebrew text. It may be added that Giesebrecht considers the LXX, text to have arisen largely through abbreviation of the Hebrew, but he rejects 17 and the prediction of restoration in 22 (' and there ; . . this place '), with the latter part of 21 (' con cerning . . . Jerusalem '). " 16. the priests. A warning addressed to the ecclesiastics was in Jeremiah s time always in place, since they counted for so much in the politics of the day, supporting with all the weight ,of their re ligious influence the struggle for freedom from Babylon advocated by the prophets. But it was specially appropriate that the warning not to expect the'Temple vessels to be restored, but rather to anticipate JEREMIAH 27. 17-22. BS 47 not to the words of ypur prophets that prpphesy unto you, saying, Behold, the vessels of the Lord's house shall now shortly be brought again frprn Babylon : for they prophesy a lie unto you. Hearken not unto them ; r7 serve the king of Babylon, and ljve : wherefore should this city become a desolation? But if they be pro- 18 phets, and if the word of the Lord be with them, let them now make intercession to the Lord of hosts, that the vessels which are left in the house of the Lord, and in the house of the king of Judah, and at Jerusalem, go not to Babylon. For thus saith the Lord 19 of hosts concerning the pillars, and concerning the sea, and concerning the bases, and concerning the residue of the vessels that are left in this city, which Nebuchad- 20 nezzar king of Babylon took not, when he carried away captive Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, from Jerusalem to Babylon, and all the nobles of Judah and Jerusalem j yea, thus saith the Lord of hosts, the 21 God of Israel, concerning the vessels that are left in the house of the Lord, and in the house of the king of Judah, and at Jerusalem : They shall be carried to Babylon, and 22 there shall they be, until the day that I visit them, saith that all the vessels which remained would follow them to Babylon, should be addressed to the custodians of the Temple in whose charge they were. . . now shortly. The LXX omits, whether rightly it is difficult to say, but the words give the correct sense, as we see from xxviii. 3, 'within two full years.' 19. Cf. Iii. 17. See Dr. Skinner's notes on 1 Kings vn. 15-39, a Kings xxv. 13-17. . . Ti 20. nobles. The word is of Aramaic origin. It occurs in 1 Kings xxi. 8, 11 ; if it is not a gloss in this passage, as some think, its use is probably due to the origination of the narrative in the Northern Kingdom. Otherwise it is a late word, being found especially in Nehemiah. In the present passage it is perhaps a sign of late date ; if so, this clause is a latter addition. It is found also in xxxix. 6. 48 JEREMIAH 27. 22—28. i. BSB the Lord ; then will I bring them up, and restore them to this place. 28 [B] And it came to pass the same year, in the beginning of the reign of Zedekiah king of Judah, in the fourth year, in the fifth month, that Hananiah the son of Azzur the prophet, which1 was of Gibeon, spake unto me in the house of the Lord, in the presence of the priests and of xxviii. 1. If the view expressed in the introduction to xxvii, xxviii is correct, the former part of this verse should be transferred to the beginning of xxvii (except of course 'in the same year' and the reference to the beginning Of the reign), see pp. 39, 40. We should probably connect, this chapter closely with xxvii, reading simply ' Then Hananiah . . . spake saying.' Hananiah. Nothing further is known of him than is recorded here. On the estimate we should form of him and the ' false pro phets' in general see Robertson Smith's article ' Prophet,' Enc. Brit. 9th ed., vol. xix, p. 817, with Cheyne's contribution to the article ' Prophetic Literature ' {Enc. Bib. 3875-8), which quotes the most important points in Robertson Smith's article, and A. B. Davidson's Old Testament Prophecy, pp. 285-308. There is no reason to doubt Hananiah's sincerity ; he probably believed in his own inspiration, and was fanatically convinced that his forecast-would be verified., But he and his class lived on traditional religion with its blending of old and new, the semi-heathenism of ancient Israel with the prophecy of the eighth century (especially Isaiah's doctrine of the indestructibility of Jerusalem) and the ideals of the reformers ; they went on repeating formulae once valid, now obsolete ; they lacked the ethical note of the higher prophecy, while they laid emphasis on a full and correct ritual ; hence they ignored the moral defects of the people, while they ardently desired that ceremonial defects should be repaired by the restoration of the Temple vessels. Gibeon: probably to be identified with el-Jib, a mile to the north of Neby Samwil, where Mizpah of Benjamin stood (see xii. 10-15), and five miles north-west of Jerusalem. It was famous in Hebrew history as the home of the Gibeonites who tricked Joshua into an alliance, and the defeat of the Canaanite confederacy formed against them in consequence (Joshua ix. 3 — x. 15) ; for the ghastly contest between the twelve warriors of Joab and the twelve warriors of Abner (2 Sam. ii. 12-17); for Joab's treacherous murder of Amasa:(2 Sam. xx. 8-12) ; for the choice of Solomon (1 Kings iii. 4-15). , unto me: should probably be deleted, since the narrative speaks of Jeremiah in the third person. JEREMIAH 28. 2-4. B 49 all the people, saying, Thus speaketh the Lord of hosts, the 2 God of Israel, saying, I have broken the yoke of the king of Babylon. Within two full years will I bring again into 3 this place all the vessels of the Lord's, house, that Nebu chadnezzar king of Babylon took away from this place, and carried them to Babylon : and I will bring again to 4 this place Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, 2. I have broken the yoke. The choice of the figure was pre sumably suggested by the presence of Jeremiah wearing his yoke, symbolic of tbe Babylonian suzerainty. Hananiah introduces his prediction with the prophetic formula claiming Divine origin for it. 3. We do not know how Hananiah was led to fix on two years as the period within which the restoration would be accom plished. It is the temptation of prophets to enhance their credit by venturing on a definiteness in prediction, which the event may or may not justify. Ambiguity is safer, since it provides ways of escape, as the givers of oracles in Greece were well aware. With prophets like Hananiah and Zedekiah, the opponent of Micaiah (1 Kings xxii. 11, 24), the wish was too much the father of the thought : the sincere but lower.type of patriotism which dominated them, together with the religious conviction that Yahweh was on their side, blinded them to the, real facts ; their enthusiasm led them to discount the odds against them. At the same time Hananiah was upheld in his belief by the sympathy of his fellow prophets and the people generally, also by the confidence felt in the neighbouring nations that revolt, at least if supported by Egypt, would be successful. He probably believed what he said, he was apparently in the prophetic ecstasy at the time, and mistook the thoughts which surged up in this self-induced state for Divine revelations. all : omitted by the LXX. It could easily fall out or be inserted, since the next two consonants are identical with it. It is omitted in 4, but is there followed by similar not identical con sonants. . It should probably be retained. Observe that the vessels of the Temple take precedence even of the king. that Nebuchadnezzar ... to Babylon : omitted by the LXX. 4. The LXX reads simply ' and Jeconiah with the captives of Judah, for I will break the yoke of the king of Babylon.' The additions in the Hebrew are superfluous, they need not on that account be secondary. . Jeconiah. That while Zedekiah was on the throne Hananiah should have ventured to predict in so many words the restoration II E 50 JEREMIAH 28. 5-7. B with all the captives of Judah, that went to Babylon, saith the Lord : for I will break the yoke of the king of Baby-' 5 Ion. Then the prophet Jeremiah said unto the prophet Hananiah in the presence of the priests, and in the pre sence of all the people- that stood in the house of the 6 Lord, even the prophet Jeremiah said, Amen : the Lord. do so: the Lord perform thy words which thou hast prophesied, to bring again the vessels of the Lord's house, and all them of the captivity, from Babylon unto 7 this place. Nevertheless hear thou, now this word that of Jehoiachin, describing him moreover, if the Hebrew text is. sound, as the king of Judah, is remarkable. .Naturally the exiles regarded him as still the legitimate king, and probably many of those left behind agreed with them, but Zedekiah would scarcely relish the prospect of deposition, nor, .we may imagine, would the upstarts who had supplanted the earlier; administrators. Jere miah in his, reply (6) makes no specific reference to Jehoiachin. 5. The characteristic, insertion of (the prophet' before the personal name, which occurs three times in 5, 6, is omitted in each case in the LXX, and similarly in the rest of the chapter and in xxix. '_.-,'-" , . ¦ 1 1 r ¦, 6. As a patriot, Jeremiah could wish: that the wound of, his country might be healed. His languageis not sarcastic ; "for the sake of the exiles themselves, for the better, administration of the State, he would be glad of their return. . But he is jnot led astray by his' preferences,- and while the desire that it might be so is sincere; he is assured that it will not be: so. It is to be noticed that he does not meet Hananiah's 'Thus; saith Yahweh' by a counter-oracle at this point (he does iso in^ig), but after, "an expression of sympathy with the desire itself, by an, argument from' history. ' 7.- His own conviction makes no impression on his antagonists, his prophetic certainty is incommunicable. He must therefore appeal to experience, and does so in the notable utterance, of 7:79, which shows how truly Jeremiah interpreted the significance of the great prophets in whose succession_-he knew himself to stand. They had been prophets, of wOe, as Jeremiah himself; only when history had confirmed the prediction of a prophet who spoke of peace, could his claim that God ;had .sent him be admitted. . So the future would decide whether Hananiah was right ; hut let him and the people ponder well the significance of the precedent. . The passage is very important for its testimony to the predominantly JEREMIAH 28. 8-u. B 51 I speak in thine ears, and in the ears of all the people : The prophets that have been before me and before thee 8 of old prophesied against many countries, and against great kingdoms, .of war, and. of evil, and of pestilence. The prophet which prophesieth of peace, when the word 9 of the prophet shall come to pass, then shall the prophet be known, a that the Lord hath truly sent him. Then 10 Hananiah the prophet took the bar from off; the prophet Jeremiah's neck, and brake it. And Hananiah spake in n * +Or, whom the Lord hath truly 'sent pessimistic character of pre-exilic prophecy in its great represent atives. It must receive its due weight in the consideration of the much debated question touching the extent to which prophecies of a happy future were uttered by -the prophets to Whom they are at present assigned, or have been inserted by later editors in their writings. Ttiat many such prophecies originated in the latter way can hardly be denied, but it is a great exaggeration of a sound principle to relegate such passages as a whole to the post-exilic period. 8. The scope of the older prophecy is to be observed ; it was not limited to Israel, but embraced many countries and great kingdoms (see vol. i, p. 78). i-c- , , evil. It is temptingto adopt the reading of some MbS. and of the Vulgate ' famine,' since it is awkward that the general term for disaster should be coupled with two specific types of calamity. It is not unusual for Jeremiah to speak of sword; famine, and pestilence. This combination may, however, be responsible for the reading ' famine ' here, and the use of ' war ' instead of the sword suggests that we have "not that combination in this passage. The LXX omits 'and of evil, and of pestilence.' 9. The close of the sentence is rather carelessly expressed. The meaning required is that then it shall be known that Yahweh has truly sent that prophet. Till then the Divine origin of his message must remain in doubt. . , , . , IO. Hananiah is not at all impressed by Jeremiah s appeal to experience. He snaps the yoke On Jeremiah s neck, affirming that thus Yahweh would break the yoke of Babylon from the neck of the nations. The act Is something more than a mere symbol, it embodies the prophetic word which is endowed with a Divine energy that works out its own fulfilment (see vol. 1, PPil;'The LXX omits 'of Nebuchadnezzar' and 'within two full E 2 52 JEREMIAH 28. u.. B the presence of all the people, saying, Thus saith the Lord : Even so will I break the yoke of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon within two full years from off the neck of all the nations. And the prophet Jeremiah went his years,' in both cases correctly ; the latter addition has been made from 2. In such a situation brevity is a sign of authenticity. Jeremiah went his way. Itis surprising that he makes no reply. Cornill argues forcibly .. that Jeremiah could not have remained silent in response to such a challenge without denying his God and abandoning his people to a lie. Accordingly he strikes out the clause as a gloss. There is much to be said for this view. It is hard to believe that Jeremiah was shaken in his own conviction by Hananiah's action. His opponent may have sin cerely believed in his own inspiration, he may have snapped the yoke on Jeremiah's neck in a prophetic ecstasy, and the ring of certainty may have been heard in his utterance 'Thus saith Yahweh.' But Jeremiah's own convictions were not such as could be disturbed by prophetic states, eyen though they were not consciously simulated, or prophetic formulae, sincerely though they might be repeated. His insight into God's purpose was not a thing of yesterday, his assurance was too deeply rooted to bend before this breath of opposition. He was a candid and a humble man ; but he could not have seriously asked himself the question whether Hananiah might not after all be right.. We may then rest assured that whatever he did, he had no intention of sug gesting that he doubted his own message. But would not "silence have suggested this ? It might no doubt be urged that his attitude had been too long and too well known for such an inference to be drawn ; that he had withstood the prophets too long for any sig nificance to be attached to his leaving Hananiah in possession of the field; that he had just given his testimony with the utmost directness. And yet we may doubt whether he could have' risked the moral impression which would have been made on the assembly by his failure to meet Hananiah's action with any reaffirmation of the message with which he had been charged. To strike out the clause may seem a violent cutting of the knot, all the more that its very difficulty may be urged in favour of its authenticity. But, as Cornill points out, it may have grown out of the words ' Go and tell Hananiah ' in 13, since the command appeared to imply that he had left the presence of his antagonist. The verb ' to go,' however, is frequently used in this book to introduce a message with which the prophet is entrusted/ and it seems to have become a mere formula, having lost its proper' significance (cf. especially xxxix. 16). Accordingly we should not press it here to imply JEREMIAH 28. 12-17, B 53 way. Then the word of the Lord came unto Jere- 12 miah, after that Hananiah the prophet had broken the bar from off the neck of the prophet Jeremiah, saying, Go, and tell Hananiah, saying, Thus saith the Lord : 1 3 Thou hast broken the bars of wood ; but thou shalt make in their stead bars of iron. For thus saith the Lord of 14 hosts, the God of Israel : I have put a yoke of iron upon the neck of all these nations, that they may serve Nebu chadnezzar king of Babylon ; • and they shall serve him : and I have given him the beasts of the field also. Then 15 said the prophet Jeremiah unto Hananiah the prophet, Hear now, Hananiah ; the Lord hath not sent thee ; but thou makest this people to trust in a lie. Therefore 16 thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will send thee away from off the face of the earth : this year thou shalt die, because thou hast spoken rebellion against the Lord. So Hana- 17 niah the prophet died the same year in the seventh month. that the two prophets had been parted. And 12 reads strangely if they had been. 13. If the policy of Hananiah was followed, they would be chastised with scorpions instead of with whips : cf. Amos v. 19. The yoke of Babylon would be fastened again on their neck, but a yoke far heavier and more galling, and one which no strength of theirs could break. thou shalt make. We should probably read, with the LXX, 'I will make : ' cf. 14, ' I have put a yoke of iron.' It is hardly appropriate to represent Hananiah. as making the iron bars, since Jeremiah had made the wooden bars at God's command. 14. tbe beasts of the field: see note on xxvii. 6. 16. I will send thee away. As Hitzig points out, the phrase is chosen with reference to ' Yahweh hath not sent thee ' in 15. because . . . the LORD. This clause is omitted in the LXX. It is a quotation from Deut. xiii. 5. It is appropriate here in so far as the passage in Deuteronomy is directed against false prophets, inappropriate since the ' defection ' there denounced is an incitement to idolatry. It. The fact of Hananiah's death, told with such impressive brevity, without comment or elaboration, is to be accepted as historical; so that while his prediction that within two years 54 JEREMIAH 29. i. B 29 Now these are the words of the letter that Jeremiah Babylon's yoke should be broken was discredited, Jeremiah's prediction that within that year Hananiah should die was verified in less than three months. . The LXX is briefer still, 'And, he. died in the seventh month/ The swift fulfilment may have done something to enhance the respect paid to Jeremiah's advice, and ' take' the heart out of the fanatics who were screaming for a vigor ous foreign policy. Cheyne. says : ' This might be a case of second sight. Cf. St. Adamnan's account of a prophecy of St. Columba that a certain boy would die at the end of the week' ( The Two Religions of Israel, p. 58). He had treated the narrative more sceptically jn his Decline and Fall of the Kingdom of Judah, P- 77- ' xxix. Jeremiah Counsels the Exiles to settle down in ; Babylon, since there is no Hope of Speedy Release. , . The links which connect this chapter with the two preceding have been already indicated in the Introduction to xxvii-xxix (see pp. 38, 39). Schmidtregards the correspondence With Babylon as 'scarcely historical'' {Enc. Bib. 2387)-;. and Cheyne considers the central statement, of the chapter, that the Babylonian oppression shall last only for a time to be" certainly unauthentic {Enc. Bib. 3879); but recent commentators have for the most part recognized a very substantial historical element in the chapter, which in its original form was probably included in Baruch's biography of Jeremiah. The detailed references to persons and events, can hardly rest on imagination, and the .situation to which tbe Jetter is addressed is entirely natural with a people whose theological beliefs would predispose them to anticipate that the exile would prove a very temporary episode in their history.- Equally con vinced with Jeremiah (xxiv) of their superiority to the rotten remnant left behind in Jerusalem^ they could not, without a com plete inversion' of their settled convictions, have thought of their own exile as permanent while Jerusalem continued to stand. And since they could not bring themselves to believe in the destruction of Yahweh's city, the downfall of the State, and the captivity of the people,, they naturally anticipated- a speedy- return , to Pales tine,' and were encouraged by their prophets in this cherished delusion. That Jeremiah, while opposing this expectation among those who were lefobehind, sought also to disabuse the exiles, is only natural, especially in view of his more friendly esteem for them. The date of the letter is not clear. But we may assume that it was sent quite early in Zedekiah's; reign, probably in 596 or 595 b- c, when the exiles! had been only a short time in their new home. It was not, we may assume, sent in 594 B; c.,; since in that year Zedekiah, instead of sending messengers to Babylon, JEREMIAH 29. i. B 55 the prophet sent from Jerusalem unto the residue of the elders of the captivity, and t6 the 'priests, and to the paid a personal visit to that city (li. 59). Accordingly we must place the incidents of this chapter at a somewhat earlier period than those of xxvii-xxviii. On the expansion the original form has undergone see the notes. xxix. i-g. This is the letter sent by Jeremiah, by the hand of Zedekiah's messengers, to those taken to Babylon with Jeconiah. Yahweh bids you settle down in your own homes", marry iarid rear families, and seek the peace of Babylon, for it is your own peace. And do not be deceived hy your prophets, who lie to you in My Name. 10-14. For after seventy years I will bring you back, since I entertain thoughts of good for you. You will pray and I will hear, you will seek Me with all your heart and find Me, and I will -gather you from all the nations of your dispersion. , 16-19. For on those who are left behind1 in Jerusalem I am sending sword, famine, and- pestilence, and will make them like uneatable figs. They shall be an execration among all the nations of their dispersion, because they have not listened to My words. 20, J15, 21—93. And listen, you that are exiles. Because you say Yahweh has raised up prophets for us in Babylon, I will give Ahab and Zedekiah the false prophets into Nebuchadnezzar's hand, and he shall, slay them by a death which shall become a proverb among you ; for they have committed adultery and spoken lies in My Name. ' -A "'-- 24-32. Shemaiah has sent to Jerusalem, remonstrating; with Zephaniah the overseer of the Temple for his remissness in not punishing Jeremiah for his letter to the exiles bidding them-, in View of the long captivity before them, settle down in Babylon. Zephaniah reads the letter to Jeremiah, who predicts that Shemaiah for his false prophecies shall1 have no man to: dwell among this people, and shall not see the good which Yahweh will do to if. xxix. 1. the residue of the elders. This has occasioned much discussion. The LXX reads simply 'the elders,' and this is adopted by Giesebrecht and Rothstein. - It is, however, as' Duhm and Cornill urge, much easier to understand the omission than the insertion of the word rendered ' the residue of.' Several explanations have been offered. Some think that the residue is mentioned, since some might have died on the journey or since their arrival in Babylonia. But the term 'residue'- suggests a depletion of their numbers greater than is at all likely from such a cause in so short a period ; moreover, the gaps made' by death would have been filled up. Arid even had some of the elders died, it would have been quite irrelevant for the writer to take account 56 JEREMIAH 29. 2, 3. B prophets, and to all the people, whom Nebuchadnezzar had carried away captive from Jerusalem to Babylon: a. (after that Jeconiah the king, and the queen-mother, and the eunuchs, and the princes of Judah and Jerusalem, and the craftsmen, and the smiths, were departed from Jeru- 3 salem ;) by the hand of Elasah the son of Shaphan, and of this in the choice of his expression. Hitzig explains that the phrase means the elders who are not also priests or prophets, but the author does not say the priests and prophets and the rest of the elders, because there would be priests and prophets who were not elders. But this explanation, though approved by Graf, can hardly be accepted, If the normal order had been felt to give an incorrect suggestion, then the sentence would have been cast in a different form rather than the order inverted in this unnatural way. r, Duhm thinks that there may have been an attempt at escape or opposition to regulations, which had cost some of the elders their liberty or their lives. Baruch might have given an account of this, or he might have presupposed it as well known. This is possible, but Jeremiah would probably have alluded to it in his letter ; it would have served admirably to enforce his exhor. tation. The choice seems to lie between the omission of the word, with the LXX, and the suggestion made by Duhm, which is accepted by Cornill. The elders seem to have had a good deal of authority entrusted to them by the Babylonians ; they are promin ent in Ezekiel. Duhm omits the reference 'to the priests and prophets, and 15 does not favour the view that the prophets were explicitly addressed. We should probably omit", with the LXX, the relative sentence 'whom . . . Babylon,' and, if so, perhaps also the words ' and to all the people.' 2. This is struck out by Cornill and others. It breaks the connexion between 1 and 3, and is largely taken from xxiv. ib, 2 Kings xxiv. 12-16. Giesebrecht retains the reference to the deportation of Jeconiah to Babylon, but regards ' and the queen- mother . . . the smiths ' as an expansion based on the passages mentioned. This is better than the elimination of the whole verse, since the note of time is not superfluous. the queen-mother: see notes on xiii. 18, 19, xxii. 25 f. smiths: see note on xxiv. 1. 3. The object of this diplomatic mission is unknown ; perhaps it was in charge of the yearly tribute. Elasah was apparently' the brother of Ahikam, mentioned as Jeremiah's protector in xxvi. 24 (see note), and of the Gemariah in whose chamber .Baruch read ^he roll (xxxvi. 10), and who interceded with Jehoiakim not to JEREMIAH 29. 4-7. B 57 Gemariah the son of Hilkiah, (whom Zedekiah king of Judah sent unto Babylon to Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon,) saying, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God 4 of Israel, unto all the captivity, whom I have caused to be carried away captive from Jerusalem unto Babylon : Build ye houses, and dwell in them ; and plant gardens, 5 and eat the fruit of them; take ye wives, and beget sons 6 and daughters ; and take wives for your sons, and give your daughters to husbands, that they may bear sons and daughters ; and multiply ye there, and be not diminished. And seek the peace, of the city whither I have caused 7 burn it (xxxvi. 25). From the fact that he took Jeremiah's letter we may infer that, like his brothers, he was friendly to the prophet. Of Gemariah the son of Hilkiah (of course to be distinguished from his namesake the son of Shaphan) we know nothing further. He was not, we may take it for granted, Jeremiah's brother, but may have been the son of the chief priest of the Temple. 5. Jeremiah dissuades the exiles from regarding their stay in Babylonia as just a passing experience. They must make up their minds to a long period of captivity. They must look on Babylon as their home, build houses and plant gardens, renouncing the pleasing delusion that they would soon be restored to their old homes in Jerusalem. 6. This verse seems to presuppose that just as some refused to build and plant in this interim condition, so they refused to marry. The refusal would rest on different grounds ; houses and gardens involved labour and expense, which would be largely wasted if they left Babylon. Wives and children they could take back with them, but young children would add greatly to the difficulties of the journey. Cornill thinks that a considerable proportion of the exiles would be young, unmarried men, and that there would not be Jewish wives for them in at all adequate numbers.^ He suggests that Jeremiah may have meant that instead of remaining unmarried in the hope of speedy return home, they should marry Gentile women. that . . . daughters : omitted in LXX. 7. The hearts of the exiles would naturally be hot with hatred for the oppressor, and if they prayed with reference to him, it would be for his downfall. But Jeremiah bids them acquire houses and gardens, that they may forge links which will bind them to the new land, and make its interest identical with their 58 JEREMIAH 29. 8-10. B you to be carried away captive, and pray unto the Lord 8 for it : for in the peace thereof shall ye have peace. For .thus -saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel : Let' not your prophets that be in the midst of you, and your diviners, deceive you, neither hearken ye to your dreams 9 which ye "cause to be dreamed.' For they prophesy falsely unto you in my name : I ihave not sent them, 10 saith' the Lord. For thus saith the Lord, After seventy a +Or, 'dream own. They are to pray for, its pe4ce; it is true the injunction is recommended by a self-regarding motive, but it was inspired by wise regard for their welfare, and altruistic appeals would have been wasted on such an audience; ' - ;- j.- ¦¦'..-.. ¦ the city. If the text isi'correct, the term probably i indicates no one city, such as Babylon, buti1 the city in Which you may happen to be. The, exiles would not be concentrated, in one place. But we should probably read ' the land,' 8, 9. Duhm regards these verses as an insertion, because no account is given of what the false prophets said, and because, it is not mentioned till 15 that the exiles believed that they had prophets among them. The former reason is unimportant ; what all knew there was no need to' repeat, and the context makes it plain.. The latter reason, which has decided Cornill, to follow Duhm, has more substance. But it is not at all decisive ; 8, 9 contain a warning against- their, prophets in general ; 15 introduces, in its true connexion, a threat against two prophets; . , ye cause to be dreamed. ' The causative- conjugation of this verb occurs nowhere, else, and the, thought itself is somewhat strange. If thej text is correct, the meaning is apparently that the people consulted the prophets and. set them dreaming that they mighf be able to give them an oracle. It is possible that the con jugation is used in the. simple sense 'ye dream.' : It would be better, however, to secure this sense, which is.givenihy the LXX, Syriac, and Vulgate, by striking out the initial letter of the verb as due to mistaken, repetition of the final letter of the pronoun. It would perhaps be better still to read ' they dream ' (as Cornill) ; it is not the people generally. Who go to theprophets to.have their dreams interpreted, but, as xxiii. 25-28 shows, the prophets who give lying oracles on the basis of their: dreams. If so, we should also, 06 course, iread' their dreams.' '; ~ ,, ; ;» 10. This verse ought not to be omitted ;, it is most appropriate that. Jeremiah's counsel should be driven home by the reminder JEREMIAH 29. rr-14. B 59 years be accomplished for Babylon, I will visit you, and perform my good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place. For I know the thoughts that n I think toward you, saith the Lord, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you a hope in your latter end. And ye shall call, upon me, and ye shall go and pray unto 12 me, and I will heafken unto you. And ye shall seek me, 13 and find me, when ye shall search for me: with all your heart. And I will be found of you, saith the Lord,' and r4 I will bturn again your captivity, and I will gather you a Heb. a latter end and hope. b Or, return to that the Babylonian dominion will last seventy years, and' only when this period is accomplished will the exile be brought to an end. On the ' seventy years' see note on Xxv. n. .-, 11. I know. The pronoun is emphatic, similarly 'I think.' Several scholars take the meaning to be, The prophets are ignorant but I know. But probably this is not the contrast intended. The point is rather that although the long delay may give the, impres sion that Yahweh's attitude to Judah is one of settled hostility, He has from the very beginning of her misfortune entertained purposes of granting her a future and a hope, i. e. a future full of hope. The people- will say ' From Yahweh my way is hid ' (Isa. xl. 27) ; but His wrath does not hide from Him His ultimate goal of mercy, He keeps: it steadily in view all the time. 12-14. The LXX has a much: shorter text. In 12 it reads < And pray unto me and I will hearken unto you.' In 14 it omits everything after the first clause,. 'And I will be found of you.' In the latter point it is plainly-superior ; , the exiles addressed were in Babylonia, not dispersed among the nations, and the verse is composed of stock phrases. It is not so clear that the omission in 12 is original ; the text, however, can hardly be. correct : 'and ye shall go' yields no satisfactory sense and spoils the parallelism-. Several suggestions have been made ; the sense required is, 'And ye shall call upon me, and I will hear you ;' i. e. though yOu'are banished from My land and My sanctuary, I still hear the cry from your distant home. , 14. I will be found of you : LXX reads ' I will appear to you :' cf. xxxi. 3. If this is part of the letter, the LXX is to be preferred, since 'find' occurs in 13. _ turn again your captivity. The original sense of this expres sion is still much disputed ; since Ewald first proposed it, many 60 JEREMIAH 29. 15. B from all tne nations, and from all the places whither I have driven you, saith the Lord ; and I will bring you again unto the place whence I caused you to be 15 carried away captive. For ye have said, The Lord hath have held the view that it meant originally 'to reverse the fortunes of,' a sense which it bears in Jobvxlii» 10 and apparently in Ezek. xvi. 53 ('of Sodom and her daughters'). In most cases, however, the rendering in R.V. is 'applicable, and may well represent the original meanifig. See Driver's' note on Deiit. xxx. 3, with the supplementary note in the Addenda. 15-20. These verses create serious difficulties. Verse 15 con nects with nothing in the preceding context but 8, 9, nor in what follows till we reach 21. Moreover in the LXX (except in Lucian's recension) 16-20 is omitted. This in itself suggests at least that 15 should stand immediately before 21, as it does in the LXX and also in Lucian's recension Where it comes after 16-20. The question as to the originality of 16-20 is somewhat more difficult, but the weight of evidence is strongly in favour of its exclusion from the text. The omission in the LXX might be accounted for by the passing of the scribe's'eye from* Babylon' in 15 to 'Babylon' in 20, or assuming that 15 stood before 21, from ' For' in 16 to ' For1 in 15. It is also true that the-connexion of 15 with 13 is not easy. It is difficult to see why a post-exilic editor should have inserted the passage, the distinction between the Jews in exile with Jehoia chin and those in Jerusalem with Zedekiah having lost all signifi cance with the destruction ;of the Jewish State. The inclusion of the verses in Lucian's recension also favours their authenticity. On the other hand, the passage has little relevance in this context; why should Jeremiah break off from his counsel to the exiles and deal with the situation in Jerusalem ? Why should he say that Yahweh will make those left in Jerusalem 'like vile figs,' which implies that xxiv was known to the readers ; and yet with a change in the application, the figure referring in xxiv to character, here to destiny? In 18, moreover, the writer forgets his assumed situa tion before the fall of Jerusalem, and speaks of the dispersion as already accomplished ; similarly in 19, ' Ye would not hear,' if the text is correct, can hardly be addressed to the first group of exiles as a reason for the dispersion which had overtaken the Jews left behind with Zedekiah. Some of these difficulties are removed by the omission of I7b (from ' I will make ')-i9, and Giesebrecht considers that the rest of the passage ought to be regarded as an authentic part of the letter. But this excision is itself a rather arbitrary critical operation, and destroys the link of contrast between 19 and 20, 'ye would not hear . . . Hear ye therefore.' JEREMIAH 29. 16-18. BS 6t raised us up prophets in Babylon, [s] For thus saith 16 the Lord concerning, the king that sitteth upon the throne of David, and concerning all the people that dwell in this city, your brethren that are not gone forth with you into captivity ; thus saith the Lord of hosts: if Behold, I will send upon them the sword, the famine, and the pestilence* and will make them like vile figs, that cannot be eaten, they are so bad. And I will 18 It is also questionable whether, if the verses are retained even in this modified form, the transposition of 15 to follow 20 and precede 21 can be justified. It is not improbably a rearrangement due tp Lucian himself. But if 15 immediately followed 13 (or 14 if that be authentic), the conclusion is inevitable that 16-20 is no part of the original text, and that Lucian's inclusion of it does not repre sent the true LXX. It is a late insertion based on earlier passages in the book, especially xxiv. 8-10, and crowded with characteristic expressions. Why a later writer should have inserted it is not clear ; possibly it reflects a post-exilic estimate of the relative merits of the Jews in Babylon and those in the dispersion, together with 'the people of the land ' in Palestine. But this is on the whole improbable, and we must content ourselves with the melancholy reflection that a reader thought the insertion of Jeremiah's unfavour able judgement on the Jews in Jerusalem would improve and complete the prophet's letter to the exiles in Babylonia. 15. Por. Since this verse is to be connected with 21, we should probably render ' Because.' The exiles congratulated themselves that though they had been banished from' Yahweh's land, His power extended even to Babylon, and there He raised up prophets to announce that He would soon break the Babylonian yoke. Ezekiel, who was quite one with Jeremiah in his judgement of the situation, did not receive his call till a few years later. Jeremiah warns his readers that they will be able to estimate the value to be attached to the message of these prophets by the fate which is soon to overtake them, and learn how premature their rejoicing had been. 16. the king: Le. Zedekiah. ; 17. The former part of the verse is taken from xxiy. 10, the latter from xxiv. 8. The word rendered 'vile ' is much stronger than the corresponding word in xxiv; it is derived from the same root as the word rendered ' a horrible thing' in v. 30. 18. The former part of the verse is largely a repetition of 17. The latter part is based on xxiv. 9 (cf. also xv. 4 with the note). The details are varied from xxiv. 9; in particular 'I shall drive 62 JEREMIAH 29. 19-21. SB pursue after them with the sword, with the famine, and with the pestilence, and will deliver them to be "tossed. to and fro among all the kingdoms of the earfh, to be an eiecration, and an astonishment, and an hissing, and a reproach, among all the nations whither I have driven 19 them-: because they have not hearkened to my words, saith the Lord, wherewith I sent unto them my servants the prophets, rising up early and sending them ; but ye 20 would not hear, saith the Lord. Hear ye therefore the word of the Lord, all ye of the captivity, whom I have sent away from Jerusalem to Babylon. 21 [B] Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, a fOr, a. terror unto , becomes 'I have driven,' and the tense ought not to be assimilated to that in xxiv. 9, the interpolator betrays himself by it. 19. Cf. Vii. 25, 26, xi. 7, 8,- xxv. 4. ye would not hear. Perhaps we should read ' they would not hear,' but it is more'likely that the interpolator has here again forgotten his assumed standpoint. 20. This verse is designed as a link to. connect the interpolated verses with the oracle that follows. - all ye . . . Babylon: cf. xxiv. 5. 21. This verse completes the sentence beguW in 15. We know nothing of Ahab and Zedekiah beyond what we learn from these passages. The LXX omitsHhe names of their fathers, but we may be sure that these names are not inventions of a scribe. The execution of these prophets would be a punishment for treasonable Utterances, such as the proclamation of the approaching downfall of Babylon and liberation of the Jews. The reference to the mode of death may possibly have been added to bring the prediction into more.exphcit conformity with the event which doubtless' ensued as described in 22. But it may be an original part of the letter. It is true that there is a play on the name KolaraHih the word rendered ' roasted ' (as there is also in the Word for 'curse '). But we have Ho valid reason for the inference that this gave rise to the story that they were put to death in this way ; though this parti-> cular word was presumably chosen?for the sake' of the assonance; and we'areprobably to regard the wOrd as equivalent to 'burn, not necessarily to roast before a fire or bake in an oven. Jere miah would be aware that such a punishment, almost unknown JEREMIAH 29. 22, 23. B 63 Concerning Ahab the son of Kolaiah,and concerning Zede-: kiah the son of Maaseiah, which prophesy a lie unto you, in my name : Behold, I will deliver them into the hand of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon; and he shall slay them before your eyes; and of them shall be taken up 22 a curse by. all the captives of Judah which are in Babylon, saying, The Lord make thee like Zedekiah and like Ahab, whom the king of Babylon roasted in the fire : because 23 among the Hebrews (Gen. xxxviii. 24, Lev. xxi. 9), was in use among the Babylonians (cf. Dan. iii). 22. Then their names would still be on men's lips, no longer as prophets, but in a gruesome formula of imprecation used by exiles to fellow exiles. Cursing in the East, however, goes to much greater lengths in expression than is common in the West, and is not to be taken too seriously, even though the Divine Name is in voked for its fulfilment. 23. The fate of these two prophets is due to their immorality and their Unjustifiable claim to speak as Yahweh's messengers (for the" combination' of the two in the prophets of Jerusalem see xxiii. 14). Obviously Nebuchadnezzar did not punish them with their horrible death for the second of these offences, and it is hardly probable that he did so for the former. Burning 1 (i. e. probably burning alive, though many think the offender was stoned and then the corpse was burnt) is the penalty prescribed in the Law of Holiness for the unchastity of' a priest's daughter (Lev. xxi. 9), and that pronounced on Tamar by Judah (Gen. xxxviii. 24) for the same offence. But in these cases 'the woman pays,' though in Lev. xx. 14 all the guilty" parties are burnt for a particular type of incest; and while the death penalty is inflicted for adultery on both the guilty parties (Deut. xxii. 22, Lev. xx. 10), it was not by burning but by stoning (Ezek. xvi. 38, 40, xxiii. 45> 47> J°nn viii- 5)) and» as we learn from tn<: Passages in Ezekiel, by thrusting them through with swords to dispatch them. In the Code of Hammurabi burning is the penalty for a peculiarly. flagrant form of incest (§ 157), but adulterers are strangled' and' cast into the water (5 129). The Jews would have ho power of inflicting death, but it is unlikely that they would take the case before the Babylonian courts, or that so ghastly a sentence would be pronounced. The offence for which Nebuchadnezzar roasted them must have been treason or possibly blasphemy against the gods of Babylon ; but Yahweh punished them for the offences mentioned by delivering them into: his hand (21). 64 JEREMIAH 29. 24. BBS they have wrought folly in Israel, and have committed adultery with their neighbours' wives, and have spoken words in my name falsely, which I commanded them not; and I am he that knoweth, and am witness,, saith the Lord. 24 . [BS] And a concerning Shemaiah the Nehelamite thou * Or, unto wrought folly in Israel. This expression is commonly (though not exclusively : cf. Joshua vii. 15) applied to breaches of chastity (Gen. xxxiv. 7, Deut. xxii. 21, Judges xx. 6,, 2 Sam. xiii. 12). Accordingly it seems here to have reference to .the former of the two offences to be enumerated, The term ' felly ' is not an adequate rendering of the Hebrew term ; both ' wisdom ' and ' folly ' had for the Hebrews a moral rather than an intellectual connotation ; and the term used here, as Driver says, ' denotes a state of mind, or an action, marked by utter disregard of moral or spiritual feeling.' 24-32. We now learn of an attempt by Shemaiah, one of the exiles, to have Jeremiah punished for his letter. The section is far from clear, and the LXX diverges considerably from the Hebrew. It is true that the LXX. gives quite, a perverted impression of the. matter, since it turns the former part of Shemaiah' s letter to Zephaniah (26) into an address to him by Jeremiah, and the rest (27, 28) into a remonstrance with both of them by Jeremiah for their abuse of him,; and crowns the, confusion by saying, in harmony with the Hebrew text, that Zephaniah read the letter (which has not been previously mentioned) to Jeremiah I Naturally this incoherent jumble cannot come into competition with the Hebrew text. But it would be too hasty to infer that it is without value for the restoration of the original. The present Hebrew text _also is in some confusion. Jeremiah is told to deliver the following message from God to Shemaiah. - The message, however, does not follow because the author goes on to assign the reason for it, namely, that Shemaiah has sent letters to Jerusalem, and then quotes his letter to Zephaniah at length, and concludes with the statement that Zephaniah read the letter to Jeremiah. Lastly we have the statement that then the word of Yahweh came to Jeremiah, bidding him send a message about Shemaiah, not to Shemaiah himself, but to the exiles. As com pared with the LXX the main points are quite clear in the Hebrew, and no one could be seriously misled as to. the course of events. Nor is it incredible that Baruch was himself responsible for the inconsequent form of the passage. It would be better to accept JEREMIAH 29. 25, 36. BS 65 shalt speak, saying, Thus speaketh the Lord of hosts, the 25 God of Israel, saying, Because thou hast sent letters in thine own name unto all the people that are at Jerusalem, and to Zephaniah the son of Maaseiah the priest, and to all the priests, saying, The Lord hath made thee priest in 26 the stead of Jehoiada the priest, that ye should be officers a reconstruction of the text which would' give us a narrative pure and simple. This involves striking out the command to Jeremiah that he should speak thus to Shemaiah. It would then be best to treat ' Concerning Shemaiah the Nehelamite ' as the title of the paragraph, and begin the narrative ' This man sent letters in his own name.' Or we could read ' Shem aiah the Nehelamite sent letters in his own name.' Duhm, to whom the chief credit for this reconstruction belongs, thinks that Baruch said nothing as to the outcome of the letter, and that his narrative closed with the statement. that Zephaniah read it to the prophet, 30-32 being an addition, imitative in character and inappropriate in content. But while the passage may have been expanded,, it probably contains a genuine kernel. The story wbuld, in fact, have closed very abruptly with 29. 24. Shemaiah the Nehelamite. Nothing is known of him beyond what we learn from this passage. It is uncertain whether ' the Nehelamite ' designates him as member of a particular family, or as belonging to a particular place, which is otherwise unknown to us. 25. Shemaiah writes in his own name, not in the name of Yahweh. It is questionable whether the plural ' letters ' is correct. The Syriac reads the singular, and only one letter is otherwise mentioned. The plural is used for a single letter, 2 Kings xix. 14, xx. ia. The LXX omits the word altogether. We should omit, with the LXX, 'unto all the people that are : at Jerusalem, and,' with ' and to all the priests,' since Zephaniah is addressed in the singular; and the duty, which Shemaiah remonstrates with him for disregarding, is his own duty, not that of the priests in general. Zephaniah : see note on xxi. 1. He is said in Iii. 24, 2 Kings xxv. 18 to have been ' the second priest,' i. e. second to Seraiah the chief priest. He was twice sent by Zedekiah to Jeremiah to ask for an oracle : xxi. 1, xxxvii. 3. He was among those executed by Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah after the capture of Jerusalem (Hi. 24-27, 2 Kings xxv. 18-21). 26. in the stead of Jehoiada the priest. In themselves the words rather favour the view that Jehoiada was Zephaniah's immediate predecessor. If so, we know nothing further of him. II F 66 JEREMIAH 29. 27. BS in the house of'the Lord, for every man that is mad, and maketh himself a prophet, that thou shouldest put him 27 in the stocks and in a shackles. Now therefore, why hast * fOr, the collar It is, however, more probable that the reference is to the famous priest Jehoiada, who deposed Athaliah and set Joash on the throne. We read that he 'appointed officers over the house of Yahweh' (2 Kings xi. 18). Their function would be to preserve order, and prevent the services from being disturbed by noisy people\who took themselves to be prophets. Of course discrimi nation had to be practised, since the conduct of a prophet whom Yahweh had truly sent might be externally indistinguishable from that of a deluded enthusiast. Pashhur, Zephaniah's predecessor, had exercised his disciplinary function in Jeremiah's case, having formed the same estimate of him as Shemaiah did now. officers. The plural is difficult : some think it refers to Jehoiada and Zephaniah ; others, including Graf, interpret ' Yahweh hath made thee priest, that officers may be in the house of Yahweh,' i. e. Zephaniah's position as priest carries with it the duty of appointing Temple officers. But we should simply substitute the singular with LXX, Syriac, Targum, and Vulgate, ' that thou shouldest be an officer.' On the duties of the overseer cf. note on xx. 1. It would be precarious to assume that the duty here mentioned was all that Zephaniah had to perform, and infer that the number of those who had to be dealt with was large. every man . . . prophet. Probably we are not to distinguish two classes here, those who are mad, and those who pose as prophets ; the two clauses refer to the same person, and mean anyone whose madness takes the form of making himself out to be a prophet. The early prophets had been distinguished by their eccentricities, their raving enthusiasm ; they sometimes impressed people with the idea that they were mad (2 Kings ix. if). When Saul was under the influence of the ' evil spirit from God,' i. e. some form of mental disorder, 'he prophesied' (R.V. margin ' raved ') ' in the midst of the house ' (1 Sam. xviii. 10). Cf. 1 Sam. x. 10-13, xix- 20-24. The great prophets from the eighth century onwards seem to have risen largely, if not completely,' above these ecstatic states and eccentric habits, but probably the lower type of prophet still exhibited the old characteristics iii no slight degree. If two classes are mentioned here, we must remember that the madman is often regarded by primitive peoples as divinely in spired. in the stocks and in shackles. For ' the stocks ' see note on xx. 2. The word rendered ' shackles ' occurs here only, and its JEREMIAH29. 28-32. BS 67 thou not rebuked Jeremiah of Anathoth, which maketh himself a prophet to you, forasmuch as he hath sent unto 28 us in Babylon, saying, The captivity is long: build ye houses, and dwell in them ; and plant gardens, and eat the fruit of them ? And Zephaniah the priest read this 29 letter in the ears of Jeremiah the prophet. Then came 30 ^ the word of the Lord unto Jeremiah, saying, Send to all 31 them of the captivity, saying, Thus saith the Lord con- , cerning Shemaiah the Nehelamite : Because that Shema iah hath prophesied unto you, and I sent him not, and he hath caused you to trust in a lie ; therefore thus saith 32 meaning is disputed. It is now generally taken, on the analogy of an Arabic word, to be an iron band fastened round the neck, so that the rendering in the margin, 'collar,' fairly represents the Hebrew. 28. As sufficient proof of Jeremiah's ' mad ' condition, Shemaiah thinks it enough to quote his advice to the exiles to settle down in their new home, since the time was long ere the captivity should be ended. The sanity of the prophet was never more apparent than when he administered this cold douche of common sense to their fevered enthusiasm. 29. Zephaniah does not follow the example set by his predeces sor (xx. 1-3), but communicates Shemaiah's letter to the prophet, which we may fairly take as a sign of sympathy with his stand point. 31. It is objected to the narrative that it betrays no conscious ness of any difficulty in sending the prophecy to Babylon. Probably the opportunities of communication were more numerous than we might anticipate. That when it reached Babylon it would circulate among the exiles may be inferred from what had happened to the previous letter. prophesied. There is no previous indication in the story that Shemaiah was one of the prophets, and there is thus a suspicious parallel with the case of Pashhur (xx. 6). But there was no occasion for an earlier reference, and there is an antecedent probability that this antagonist of Jeremiah should, like Hananiah, belong to the ranks of the prophets. 32. It is strange that Jeremiah should include as an element in Shemaiah's punishment that he should not behold the good that Yahweh would do to His people. This seems to refer to the return from exile, but since Jeremiah did not expect this for F 2 68 JEREMIAH 29. 32*— 30. 1. BSS the Lord, Behold, I will punish Shemaiah, the Nehela mite, and his seed; he shallinot have a man to dwell among this people, neither shall he beholdthe good that I will ,do unto my people, saith the, Lord : because he hath spoken rebellion against the Lord. 30 [s] The word, that came to, Jeremiah from the Lord, ' * "¦ ~- '¦.''.' ¦ 1 seventy years, it would have been remarkable if Shemaiah had been alive at the time. The LXX reads ' there shall not be a man of them in the midst of you to see the good,' which is to be preferred since it gives an acceptable sense, that none of Shemaiah's. descen dants should see the restoration accomplished. The LXX omits the last clause, see xxviii. 16. xxx, xxxi. The Glorious Future of Israel and Judah. These chapters break the series of biographical sections.! Ori ginally we may suppose that they closed the collection of Jeremiah's prophecies which, before they were united with Baruch?s,memoirs, consisted of i-xxv, xlvi-li, xxx-xxxi. When the fusion of the prophecies with the memoirs took place, xxx, xxxi was presum ably placed in its present position because xxix, with its references to the restoration (xxix. 10 ff., 32), seemed to forma suitable intro duction to it. This section has for a long time challenged the, suspicious scrutiny of critics. , Movers, impressed by the striking similarities between these chapters and the latter part of Isaiah, put forward the view that the chapters had been worked over by the Second Isaiah. This view was adopted by de Wette and Hitzigj but the three scholars differed widely in detail. In reply Graf admitted the similarity with Isa. xl-lxvi, but urged that this was accounted for by similarity of content,, and that the striking coincidences in expression were to be explained as due to imitation of Jeremiah on the part of the Second Isaiah. He met Hitzig's accusation that „ the chapters were characterized by lack of connexion, with the counter-charge that this could properly be brought only, against the prophecy as Hitzig, had reconstructed it, and with the demon stration that the prophecy, as we have, it, is a well-connected Whole. The force of Graf's plea for the authenticity, combined with the divergence between those who impugned it and the lmsatisfactoriness of their reconstructions,had the effect of rehabili tating the Jeremianic authorship in {he eyes of critics, till Stade and Smend rejected it altogether. The grounds for this conclusion were not communicated by Stade in the footnote in which he JEREMIAH 30. 2. S 69 saying, Thus speaketh the Lord, the God of Israel, saying, 2 stated it {Geschifhte Israels, i. 643), but Smend examined the question with some, fullness in the first edition of his Alttestamentliche Reli- gionsgeschichte. He argued that these chapters did not even' spring out of the exile, but presupposed trie- return which is not men tioned, Judah js in a miserable condition, the prophet look's forward to a speedy deliverance which isto come through the res toration of Ephraim and itsreiinion with Judah. 'It' .was'. true that Jeremiah had predicted the restoration of Ephraim .(iii),'but he had combined the restoration of Ephraim with the rejection of Judah, while the author of xxx, xxxi combined the expected i'eturn of Ephraim with the already accomplished Return of Judah. Further, whereas' Jeremiah expected the exile to last a long While, the a)i(thor of xxx, xxxi anticipated a speedy restoration. Since the prc^ phecy was written in Palestine (jtxxi, 8, 21), but after the destruc4- tion of Jerusaleni (xxx. 18,'xxxi. 40), it can' have been written by Jeremiah; if he was its author, only in the few months Which elapsed pelyireeii the fall of Jerusaleni and his cdmpuljtory journey to Egypt. 'But a longer time; seems to' have elapsed, Judah's wound is seen to be. incurable, the nation's have abandoned heft The sttiay of Smend's discussioiii convinced the 'present' writer, before Giesebrecht' s commentary came into his-rian'ds, that the insertion of a considerable non-Jefeniiahic eleiheht had to be admitted, but that there, was no justification for the relegation of the whole to the post-texilic period, and in particular for1 the rejec tion of the prophecy of the New Covenant. Smend's arguments' Were submitted to a careful examination by Giesebrecht in the first edition of his commentary. He drew a distinction between the two chapters. He gave up the Jeremianic origin of .xxx entirely, having been convinced by Srnehd's- argui ments that 18-21 constituted no exception, a point on which he hacTpreViously hesitated. But in xxxi he recognized ' the authen. ticity of 2-6, 15-20. 27-34. The two f°rmer, which deal with the restoration of Ephraim, he assigned to Jeremiah's earliest period. Duhm largely agreed with ' Giesebrecht as to these passages, accepting 'xxxi. 2-6, 15-32*., But he also retained xxx. 12- rs for Jeremiah. On the other hand he followed Smerid' in rejecting, though only after long "hesitation and with much reluctance, Jeremiah's authorship of the New Covenant passage. Erbt accepted xxxi. 2-6, 15-17, 18-20. Cornill considered1 that the Jeremianic elements in the chapters were xxxi. 2-5, 9*, 15-22 , which belonged to the first period of > the prophet's; work, and xxxi. 31-34, the prophecy on the New Covenant spoken after the destruction of Jerusalem. V Rothstein,.on the contrary, is prepared to recognize a good part of the poetical passages in both chapters as Jeremianic. 7o JEREMIAH 30. 2. S Write thee all the words that I have spoken unto thee in This survey will have shown that there is considerable consen sus of opinion among recent writers, that little if any 'Jeregiiianic matter is to be found in xxx, but that the prophecy, of Ephraim's restoration in, xxxi is largely authentic. On the other hand there is still a sharp divergence, of opinion pn tb,e most important of all thp problems raised in.connexion with the criticism of the book, the authorship of the great oracle on the New Covenant, xxxi. 31-34. The detailed discussion can most profitably be reserved for the notes. Here a few general observations on the tiyo chapters may be offered. ¦ In;view of the unity winch pervades these chapters we should regard them as a single well-planned composition, which must belong in its present form to the post-exilic period. This date is established by the Situation presupposed in it, and by its relations to II Isaiah.. Had Jer. xxx, xxxi been used by the Second Isaiah, as Graf maintained, we should have expected him to draw on it throughout, but the points of contact are confined to certain portions. Accordingly we may infer that at least the sections which present close parallels with II Isaiah, and therefore the composition as a whole, is post-exilic At the same time the probabilities that a genuine Jeremianic nucleus is present are con siderable. The parallelism with Jer. iii is striking, and In particular the invitation to Ephraim to return. The compiler, however, felt that; the prominence of Npr'hern Israel" threw Judah into the background, and this largely accounts for the additions which he made. On the prophecy, of the New Covenant the reader must refer to the special discussion of the ^passage ; here the present writer must simply register his unshaken conviction that though in its present form we may owe it to" Baruch, the prophecy itself comes from Jeremiah and from no other, and is the worthy crown qf his teaching, as he has sought to show in the Introduction to this work (vol. i, pp. 43-48). The date at which xxx, xxxi was compiled is a matter for con jecture. Duhm believes that it contains very late elements. A far more moderate position is taken by Schmidt, who says.that it falls between the prophecies collected in Isa. xl-lv, and those found in Isa. Ivi-lxvi. He thinks that it was written on the.' eye of Xerxes' expedition against Greece. ' The gathering of tremendous armies from all lands for a decisive combat may well have struck terror into the hearts of Judacans' {Enc. Bib. 2391). xxx. 1-3. Yahweh bade, Jeremiah write all He had spoken to him in a book, in view of the restoration of Israel and Judah. 4-1 1. Why is this consternation? Why do men display such anguish? Itis theGreat Day, adayof trouble for Jacob, which shall issue in his deliverance. His yoke shall be broken, no more shall JEREMIAH 30. 3. S 71 a book. For, lo, the days come, saith the Lord, that he serve strangers, but Yahweh and David their king. Fear not, Jacob, the servant of Yahweh, for thou shalt be restored and rest in thy land. I will utterly destroy the nations of thy dispersion, but thee I will only chastise. 12-17. Zion's hurt is incurable, she is forsaken by her lovers ; Yahweh has inflicted her wound to punish her for her sins. All her enemies shall suffer retribution for the injuries they have done to her ; but she shall be healed, outcast though she has been called. 18-22. Jerusalem shall be rebuilt, it will be filled with thanks giving and merriment ; its inhabitants will be multiplied, honoured, and protected. They shall be governed by a, native ruler, whom I will cause to draw near to Me ; they shall be My people, and I will be their God. 23, 24. Behold the storm of Yahweh's anger is about to burst on the wicked, nor will it cease till His purpose is fulfilled. The event will make plain the meaning of the threat. xxxi. 1-6. Then I will be a God to all the families of Israel, and they shall be My people. Those who survived the sword have found favour in exile ; I will go to restore Israel. From afar Yahweh assures Israel of His undying love. I will re-establish thee, O virgin of Israel ; thou shalt join in the merry dance, and plant vineyards on the slopes of Sanjaria. They will go up from Ephraim to Yahweh in Zion. 7-14. Rejoice for: the salvation of Israel ; a great company from, the north country and the ends of the earth is led back by, Me, who am once more Israel's father and count Ephraim as My first born. Let the nations hear of Israel's restoration. They shall rejoice in Zion and feast on Yahweh's bounty ; all their desire shall be satisfied. Mourning shall be turned into merriment, and all shall be abundantly content. _ ' 15-22. The voice of Rachel is heard lamenting for the children she has lost. Cease thy tears : thy children shall come back to thee. Ephraim repents his former waywardness, and pleads with Yahweh to restore him. I yearn over him, even when I rebuke him ; I will have mercy upon him. Return, Israel, to thy cities. Why go hither and thither ? Yahweh has created a new thing : a woman will be turned into a man. 33-26. Again in Judah will Yahweh's blessing be invoked on the Temple ; its inhabitants shall be husbandmen and shepherds. He has satiated the weary. I woke to reality from my slumber, and realized that it was all a pleasant dream. 27-30. I will give Israel and Judah the seed of man and beast, and as I have cast them down, so I will build them up. No longer shall the children complain that they are punished for their fathers sins, but each shall suffer for his own. 72 JEREMIAH 30. 4- S I will f»turn again the captivity of my people Israel and Judah,, saith the Lord : and I will cause them to return, to. the, land that I gave to their fathers* and they shall 'possess it. And ;tbese are the words that the Lorr spake concern- ¦; ' a Or, return, to ' " ' c! 31-34. I will make a New Covenant with Israel and Judah, not like' that which I niXde when J, brought them put of Egypt, a cove- nant which they broke ; but I will write My law in their hearts, I will be' their God and they shall be My people. And hone shall teach another the knowledge' of YahWeh, for all shall know Me, and I will forgive arid forget their sin. 35-37. If the laws which control the shining of the heavenly bodies are abolished, Israel also shall cease to be a'iiatipri. before Me. If heaven can be measured! and the^ foundations of the earth be searched out, I wiil cast off Israel; for its sin. , 38-40. Jerusalem shalt be rebuilt larger than before,, and' never again be destroyed. ' ^ xxx. 2. all the words. If this is taken strictly it would imply a direction to Jeremiah to compile a complete collection of his prophecies, and the revelation which as yet he fed not given to the world. The question would then arise in what relation this stood to the collection of prophecies made in the fourth year oi Jehoiakim (xxxvi. 2). The latter was not necessarily complete ; it contained prophecies against . Jerusalem (so LXX) and Judah and the nations, and these were prophecies of denunciation and judgement. But if in' the present passage a complete collection is intended it would naturally include the collection alreaidy-made; and the absence of any reference to that roll would be perplexing. But we should probably not press the phrase. • From- 3 we learn that the prophecies are to be collected in* view of the return of Israel and Judah to Palestine, and from 4 that they are to be identified with; what follows. We might then take 'all the Words ' to mean all contained in this section. But perhaps the; meaning is that the prophecies previously published were of a threatening character and gave only a one-sided representation of his teaching : 'all the words' have not yet been written ; only when the pro mises of the blessed future have been vadded will the collection be complete. It need hardly be added that 1-4 will not be earlier than the date at which xxx-xxxi was c6mpiled. , 3. turn again the captivity : see note on xxix. 14, The phrase occurs rather frequently in xxx-xxxiiii 4. The form of expression, may be intended to suggest a con- JEREMIAH 30; 5-7. S 73 ing Israel and concerning Judah. For thus saith- the 5 Lord : We have heard a voice of trembling, a of fear, and not of peace.'- Ask ye now, and see whether a man 6 doth travail with child: wherefore do I see every man with'his hands on h'is- loins, as a woman in travail, and , all faces are turned into paleness ? Alas ! for that' day is 7 great, so that none is. like it : it is even the time of * +Or,. there is fear, and no peace trast with the collection of words spoken concerning the foreign nations. ,'.,-.'* -,- ;j • 5. thus saith the LOED. If these words are to be retained, we should take the rest of the "verse as a quotation byi Yahweh of the people's words, inserting 'Ye say' in the translation (so Driver), since it is inappropriate to represent Yahweh as saying, « We 'have heard.' But the words' are apparently a thoughtless; and rather "too 'characteristic, addition by some scribe. It is the people who are speaking. The Day of Yahweh has come ; men cry out in the panic which has overtaken them. 6.' The posture and the paleness would in a woman suggest the throes Of childbirth ; if men exhibit the same symptoms it is a sign of a bitter, if a different, anguish. Cf. Isa. xiii. 8y Nah. ii. 10, Joel ii. 6. The superfluous Clause ' as a woman in travail ' is ' best omitted, wish the LXX. 7. that day* i. e. the Day of Yahweh. This was originally, as we may infer from Amos v. ,18, an element in the popular theology of Israel, expressing the expectation of a great intervention on the part of Yahweh, when He would crush all her foes and place her in a position of unchallenged supremacy. Amos i warned the people that it would be a day of disaster and judgement, not of triumph, and his transformation of the idea was accepted' by his true successors, many of whom give lurid descriptions of it, the most elaborate being that of Zephaniah. The Dies Irae is its counterpart in mediaeval Christianity. In the later. Hebrew pro phecy, however, the idea of the Day as issuing in Israel's salva tion came back, conformably to the rule that prophecy before, the destruction of the State was predominantly propheeyof judgement, after itiprophecy of restoration. But salvation is' reached through tribulation, which in the later Jewish theology was referred to as 1 the woes of the Messiah.' The most familiar example is to be found in the eschatological discourse in the Gospels (see Mark xiii. 7, 8, 17-20,24).' - ' ' - so that none is lake it. This is probably the meaning ; it 74 JEREMIAH 30. 8-iq. S 8 Jacob's trouble; but he shall be saved out of it. , And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Lord of, hosts; that I will break his yoke from off thy neck, and will burst thy bands \: and strangers shall no more serve them-* 9 selves of him : but they. shall serve the; Lord their God, and David their king, whom I will raise up unto them, to Therefore, fear thou not, 0 Jacob my servant, saith the involves a slight change in the present pointing, which gives the sense ' whence is any like it ? ' See note on x. 6. Jacob's trouble, j Jacob is a favourite designation of the Israelitish people in II Isaiah, and some of the later writers. 8. The former part of the verse is largely taken from Isa. x. 27, with an addition from Jer. ii. 20. The harsh change from the third to the second person is probably due to the fact that the passage is a quotation, but whether the, poet retained the second person of the quotation, or whether he conformed it to the context and wrote the third person (so LXX, except that it substitutes the plural for the singular), and our present Hebrew text originated from assimi lation to Isa. x. 27 is uncertain. The present writer prefers the former view, since he considers it easier to believe that the LXX corrected the awkward Hebrew than that a scribe would create the incongruity under the influence of Isa. x. 27; all the more that the LXX itself is not quite satisfactory in that it reads the plural. The yoke is the heathen dominion. But while it is political servitude only, and not idolatry as well, which is intended, the combination Yahweh and David in . the next verse suggests that behind the heathen empires stood the supernatural rulers, 'the host of the high ones on high? of Isa. xxiv. - thy hurt, because thy pain is incurable? ment has been executed, but if Jerem'iah's'the passage is probably pre'-exilic rather than composed just after the iriestruction of Jerusalem. It is perhaps on the whole more likely that it is. the work of a later writer. ¦ 12. Cf.xv. 18,: Where Jeremiah uses with reference to himself language similar to that here used*' as the feminine pronouns show, with reference to Zion. Her desperate state seems now to be of long standing. I > 1 •<•• ' 13. The sudden 'transition from ¦ «he medical to the judicial metaphor is very harsh; and the text is accordingly suspicious. The R.V. gives the sense according to die accents, but this involves a mixtureof the nietaipfaiois: - The R1V1 malrgi -avoids Jfois;' but if the text is retained it would be better to render with Driverl, ' There is none to plead thy cause: [there are noJ'Bl'edicines for the sore; there is no plaister for thee.' 'It would ber better 'still,' with Duhm, to omit the first clause, which is apparently a gloss. The word rendered ' wound ' iii the ^margin means something bound up rather than 'pressing' or 'binding up,! so that 'wound' is the correct translation. For the last clause of the verse cf. xlvi. n. 14. thy lovers: Zion's old heathen allies ; cf. iv.30.. Thelatter part of the verse ('for ,'i . increased.') recurs in 15. It is .probable that the repetition is :due to • accident; the words come better in 15, and should be struck out here.o >• 15. The rendering in the text suggests that it is useless for Zion to lament, since her pain is incurable. The margin is preferable^' though ' that ' would be better than ' because.'. Why should Zion complain ofher hurt, that no remedy can assuage her pain or heal her wound ? The fault is all her own ; the gravity of her punishment is due: recompense for the gravity Of her crime. Rothstein takes 15, 16 to be an expansion. , JEREMIAH 30. 16, 17. S 77 done these things unto thee. Therefore all they that 16 devour thee shall be devoured ; and all thine adversaries, every one of them, shall go into captivity ; and they that spoil thee shall be a spoil, and all that prey upon thee will I give for a prey. For I will restore a health unto 17 thee, and I will heal thee of thy wounds, saith th& Lord ; a See ch. viii. 22. 16, 17. The connexion with the preceding is difficult, since the sinfulness of Zion is no reason for its restoration. It is questionable whether we can substitute, ' nevertheless ' for ' there fore,' and the thought, though Zion deserves all she has received I will nevertheless punish her oppressors, is not very attractive. Keeping the present text, it is best to take ' therefore ' to mean ' because thy case is so desperate.' The words ' Itis Zion ' have by many been taken as a gloss, but it. was too obvious that Zion was intended for the need of such a gloss to be felt. The LXX reads ' This is your quarry,' the Hebrew word for 'quarry ' or ' spoil ' being very similar to that for ' Zion.' If this is accepted we should probably correct 'your' into 'our,' the two being easily confused in Greek. Cornill, who proposes this emendation, then reverses the order of 16, 17. He thus gets rid of the difficulty caused by 'Therefore,' but instead of the equally unsuit able 'For' is forced to read 'I' {anoki instead of ki). He also prepares for ' they that devour thee ' (Heb. ' eat thee ') by the words of the enemy ' This is our quarry.' The reconstruction (which is accepted by Kent) gives a smooth and orderly text, but it is reached by rather drastic measures, and further involves the elimination of the words ' whom no man seeketh after,' which are Unsuitable with ' This is our quarry.' It can hardly be accepted with any confidence. < 16. devour. In ii. 3 the word is. appropriate, because Israel has just been described as ' the first-fruits; ' its use here, without any such explanation in the context, is not so easy to understand. If Corrall's transposition of 16 and 17 be rejected, we should probably see here a reminiscence of ii. 3 : cf. x. 25. _ shan go into captivity. The LXX reads 'shall eat their own flesh;' Cornill accepts this, referring to Isa. xlix. 26, ' And I will feed them that oppress thee with their own flesh;' we might compare Jsa. ix. 20. It is noteworthy that in the other clauses of the verse the verbs are repeated ('devour. . . devoured*' &c), and we should have expected this clause to follow the same pattern. 17.. restore health unto thee: rather 'bring up fresh flesh upon thee : ' see note on viii. 22. . 78 JEREMIAH 30. 18-20. S because they have called thee an outcast, saying, It is 18 Zion, whom no man a seeketh after. Thus saith the Lord : Behold, I will b turn again the captivity of Jacob's tents, and have compassion on his dwelling places ; and the city shall be builded upon her own ° heap, and the 19 palace shall d remain after the manner thereof. And out of them shall proceed thanksgiving and the voice of them that make merry : and I will multiply them, and they shall not be few ; I will also glorify them, and they shall not ao be small. Their children also shall be as aforetime, and their congregation shall be established before me, and a Or, carethfor b'Or, return to " Or, mound Heb. tel. 1 d Or, be inhabited Zion. For the LXX reading ' quarry ' see above. Modern suggestions are • a monument,? ' a desert,' ' miserable.' 18. turn again the captivity : see xxix. 14. the city. This may be collective, meaning the cities of Judah (and similarly ' the palaces ' ) ; if a particular city is meant it will be Jerusalem. It is to be rebuilt on its tel or mound, i. e. on its old site. remain after the manner thereof. The verb means to dwell, and may be rendered as in the margin, or 'be situated.' If the former, the phrase means that the palace will be inhabited as it was wont to be. If the latter, we must take the word rendered ' manner ' (literally ' right ') to be equivalent to ' its rightful place,' which forms a better parallel to ' her mound ' than the R.V., which would have been expressed more naturally in rather different Hebrew. 19. When Yahweh turns again the captivity of Zion, their mouth will be filled with thanksgiving and merriment (Ps. cxxvi. 1, 2) ; and they will not have to mourn over a land depleted of its population (contrast Isa. xxvi. 18, rendering ' been born ' for ' fallen '). They will no longer be a despised people (Isa. liii. 2, 3), but honoured among the nations. 20. The people will be as in the time of the nation's greatness and prosperity under David and Solomon. congregation : a characteristic term of the Priestly Document in the Pentateuch. Its use is not probable in a pre-exilic writer, who would have regarded Israel as a State rather than just an ecclesiastical community. JEREMIAH '30. 21-23. S 79. I will punish all that oppress them. And their prince 21 shall be of themselves, and their ruler shall proceed from the midst of them ; and I will cause him to draw near, and he shall approach unto me : for who is he that a hath had boldness to approach unto me? saith the Lord. And ye shall be my people, and I will be your God. " b Behold, the tempest of the Lord, even his fury, is "2 3 gone forth, a c sweeping tempest : it shall burst upon the * Heb. hath been surety for his heart. b See ch. xxiii. 19, 20. c Or, gathering 21. They will be governed by a native ruler; the term 'king' is avoided. The contrast is with the government by foreign empires, Assyria, Egypt, Babylon, Persia, possibly Greece. This ruler will stand in the most intimate relations with God, to whom indeed he will act as priest. Not, however, as earlier high-handed kings who took it on themselves to approach God. That no one would dare to do who truly understood what the approach of a sinful mortal to the holy God involved (Isa. vi. 5 : cf. Luke v. 8). He will not take the dread function on himself (cf. Heb. v. 4), but God will graciously cause him to draw nigh. It is possible that priestly privilege and duty are not claimed here for the ruler, but the language has more point, if the prince is also the priest. It would be easiest to understand this ideal if the author was writing in the time of the Maccabean priest- kings, but it is not probable that the passage is so late. 22. Cf. xxiv. 7, xxxi. 33. This verse is absent from the LXX, and is probably an insertion, on account of the transition to the second person plural, and the anticipation of xxxi. 1. 23, 24. These verses occur, in a quite unsuitable context, in xxiii. 19, 20 (see notes on that passage). Here a prediction of judgement is more in keeping with the eschatological terror of the passage, and Duhm considers them to be in their original connexion. Others regard them as an insertion. ' The wicked,' according to the general use of the term, are not the heathen but ungodly Jews, and the verses mean that before the restoration (xxxi. 1) can take place, a sifting blast of judgement is to go through the people, destroying the wicked, and leaving only the righteous to form the new nation. But this thought is scarcely in harmony with the general drift of these chapters, so that the verses are probably an insertion. sweeping-. The sense of the Hebrew word is uncertain ; if the text is correct, we may render 'sweeping ' or ' roaring.' But 80 JEREMIAH 30. 24— 31. 2. SJ 24 head of the wicked. The fierce anger of the Lord shall not return, until he have executed, and till he have per formed the intents , of his heart : in the latter days ye shall understand it. .' 31 At that time, saith the Lord, will I; be the God of all the 2 families of Israel, and they shall be my people. [J] Thus we should probably substitute the very similar word found in the parallel passage, ' whirling ' (xxjii. 19). xxxi. 1. This verse forms a link between the two chapters, and should therefore be assigned to the author who composed the two chapters, on the basis of Jeremianic material. In the bright future Yahweh will be the' God of all the Hebrew tribes, not of one section alone. The disruption created by the folly of Rehoboam will be repaired. 2-6. This section is now generally regarded as containing a poem by Jeremiah on the restoration of the northern tribes. It probably belongs to his earliest period, like the similar utterance in the third chapter. ¦ , ¦ 2. The verse is difficult. The R.V. text takes us back to the Exodus, when YahWeh intervened to save His people. This is strongly recommended by the reference to the wilderness, which 1 reminds us of Jeremiah's description of the love between Yahweh and His people in the period of the wandering (ii. 2, 3, 7) which culminated in His gracious bestowal of the land of Canaan wherein she might ' rest ' (ii. 7 : cf, Exod. xxxiii. 14 ; DeUt. iii. 20, xii. 9, 10 ; Joshua xxii. 4). The contrast of tenses here and in 4 ff. also favours this reference to the past. More probably, however, we should take the meaning to be that Israel in its captivity has1 found favour and wi)l be restored. This is the main: subject of the poem, and while it is not uncommon for the restoration to be compared with the deliverance from Egypt,, we should expect the transition to be made plain. The tense is prophetic, and we should render ' hath found,' i.e. will find. The 'wilderness' must then be taken as a figurative expression for the land Of exile, which while literally inappropriate, is chosen partly- with a backward glance at the wilderness wandering, but chiefly under the influence of Hosea's Words : ' Therefore, behold, : I will allure her, and bring her into the wilderness, and speak to her heart' (Hos. ii. 14). It must be admitted that such a use of the term without express indication that the usual sense is not intended is rather strange. Erbt deletes it, but it would be better to emend the text. Cornill suggests the word rendered .'dungeon ' in Isa. xiii. 7 {tnasgir- for midbar), which is there used as a metaphor for captivity. JEREMIAH 31. 3,4. J 81 saith the Lord, The people which were left of the sword a found grace in; the wilderness; even Israel, bwhen ,1 went to cause him to rest. The Lord appeared °of old 3 unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlast ing lOve : "therefore d with lovingkindness have, I drawn thee. Again will I build thee, and thou shalt be built, O 4 "Or, havefotind. . . when I go . * -\Qr,. when herwe'nf to JSntft him rest "" " ° f Or, front afar d Or, have I continued lovingkind ness unto, thee , left of the sword. This expression cannot easily be reconciled with a reference to the Exodus, but it, accurately, describes what happened in connexion with exile, since the captives were the survivors of a nation decimated by war. or by executions; Israel : i. e., as . the- sequel shows, the Northern -Kingdom. Duhm connectsthe word, which is in the Hebrew the last word of 2, with' 3, changing it into ' God will regard ' {yashur, 'el), which gives a parallelism with 'Yahweh appears.' when I . . . rest. It would be better, to make Israel the subject as in the margin, ' when he went to find him rest.' S. Israel is?the speaker, but it would be better to read, with the LXX, ' unto him.' • „,. . ,. ' of old. The marginal rendering ' from afar ' should have been adopted in the text here, as in xxx. 10, li. 50, '; remember Yahweh from afar,' and 'hath appeared' should.be substituted for ' appeared.' Yahweh from, His, distant home in Palestine (li. 50) appears to His people, languishing in exile, as their deliverer. Rothstein reads ' He thathath compassion on 1 him ' {m'rahamo), and omits ',the Lord.' with lovingkindness ... thee. The margin givesi the same sense to the verb as in Ps. xxxvi. 10 (' continue thy loving- kindness.:' cf. Ps. cix. I2,,R.V. marg.). The thought is quite appropriate ; the unchanging God, in spite of all Israel's unfaithfulness and the /severity; with which He has treated her, still cherishes His ancient love. The rendering in the text should probably be preferred ;, the, influence of :Hosea on this congenial spirit was deep, and we should interpret this passage in the light of Hos. xi. 4, * I drew them with cords of a man, with, bands of love.' It would be better to substitute ' I draw thee ' for ' have I, drawn thee.' His arms of love, which once clasped Ephraim, upheld and guided his first tottering steps (Hos. xi. 3), now reach out to draw him back from the ' far country ' to his Fatheris house. 4. Once again Israel will be firmly established in .her own land, and renew her ancient life of peaceful toil relieved by innocent II G 82 JEREMIAH 31. 4. J virgin of Israel : again shalt thou be adorned with thy tabrete, and shalt go forth in the dances of them that mirth and festivity. This idyllic picture deserves to be made prominent in any estimate of Jeremiah ; it is one of many indica tions that he was no sour and morose enemy of recreation and merriment. Cornill justly emphasizes the significance of the fact that he should mention first in his description of the consequences of the restoration, not lofty spiritual blessings, but tabrets and dances. shalt thou . . . tabrets. Israel is here addressed under the figure of a maiden, who on a festal occasion decks herself with tabrets. It is the whole people which is thus to be as light-hearted and enter as fully into the merry-making as a young maiden would. No doubt the actual dancing and timbrekplaying. on the part of the virgins would constitute one of the most characteristic forms of this festivity. Jeremiah, in spite of his exclusion from it, had doubtless often felt the sympathetic thrill as he watched the happy scene. The word rendered 'tabret' is in several cases rendered ' timbrel.' It consisted of a wooden or metal ring, over which a skin was tightly stretched. It was a kind, of hand-drum or tambourine, used specially by women, who held it in one hand and played on it with the fingers of the other. Miriam led the women with her timbrel, and they followed her with timbrels and dances, to celebrate the overthrow of Pharaoh's army (Exod. xv. 20, 21) ; and Jephthah was welcomed by his ill-fated daughter, his only child, ' with timbrels and with dances,' when he returned from his victory over the Ammonites (Judges xi. 34). the dances of them that make merry. These would be cele brated especially at the harvest and vintage, and the maidens were prominent in them, as we see from the story of the marriage by capture of the daughters of Shiloh (Judges xxi. 19-21 : cf. ix, 27). Dancing has become so completely secularized, to say the least, in modern life that jt requires an effort of imagination to realize to what extent it has. been a religious exercise. It has been so prac tised in many ages and by many peoples. Among the Hebrews the most conspicuous example is that of David, who when the ark was brought into his city, ' danced before Yahweh with all his might' (2 Sam. vi. 14), and met Michal's prudish censure of his indeco rous enthusiasm with the reply, ' I will be yet more vile.' Such glowing religion the conventional are apt to despise; and a frigid morality has no insight to comprehend it.> On the place of danc ing in the religion of the post-exilic period the essay by, Franz Delitzsch, ' Dancing and the Criticism of the Pentateuch in Rela tion to One Another ' {Iris, pp. 189-204), will be found of in terest. JEREMIAH 31. s. J 83 make merry. Again shalt thou plant vineyards upon the 5 mountains of Samaria : the planters shall plant, and shall S. This verse presupposes that the vineyards of Samaria had been destroyed. To replant them implies that the owners were confident in the security of their tenure. For while corn may be sown and reaped within a few months, several years have to pass before the vineyard (and still more the oliveyard) makes any return. No one would be willing to invest his labour and risk his money in planting vineyards) unless there was a reasonable pros pect that no foe would be likely to ravage it., It does not necessarily mean that in war the vineyards would inevitably be destroyed by the invaders ; unless hostilities were pushed to an extreme they and the oliveyards were usually spared. But their destruction was frequently effected in warfare. (See Ramsay, Pauline and Other Studies, pp. 232-41.) Hence the promise that- every man should sit under his own vine and fig-tree, was tanta mount to the assurance that the country would enjoy peace, and its inhabitants an undisturbed possession. ' The mountains of Samaria ' (Amos iii. 9) are those of the kingdom generally, not simply of the capital, which of course had its fruitful vineyards (Isa. xxviii. 1). "Vineyards were planted in terraces on the moun tain slopes (cf. Isa. v. 1, ' my well-beloved had a vineyard in a very fruitful hill ') for the sake of the sunny exposure, and -because the soil was more favourable. In his essay ' The Bible and Wine ' {Iris, pp. 171-85), Delitzsch says : 'The experiments of recent times confirm the fact, that while the sandy soil of the coast yields more, the chalky soil of the highlands yields better wine ' (p. 174). The mention of Samaria attests the Jeremianic origin of the poem ; a post-exilic writer would hardly have spoken thus of Jerusalem's hated rival. the planters . . thereof. The text is uncertain, but the R.V. probably gives the general sense. The margin justifies the rendering ' enjoy ' by its references. According to Lev. xix. 23- 25 the fruit was treated as ' uncircumcised,' and therefore not to be eaten for the first three years. In the fourth year it was ' holy for giving: praise unto Yahweh.' In the fifth year it could be eaten. It was, in other words, at first taboo, unfit for God, withi held from man. The ceremonial offering to Yahweh in the fourth year removed its ' uncircumcision,' and rendered it fit for profane or common use in the fifth year ; just as the crops could not be eaten till. the flrstfruits had been offered. Instead ;of 'enjoy the LXX read 'praise.' The two verbs are almost identical in Hebrew. The problem raised by the variation is not quite simple, but 'since it is probable on metrical grounds that some words have fallen, out, it seems best to conclude that the original text had G 2 84 JEREMIAH 31.-6. J 6 a enjoy the fruit thereof For there shall be a day, that "¦ Heb. profane, or, make common. See Lev.'xix. 23-25 ; - Deut. xx. 67 xxviii. 30: - ' and praise Yahweh ' at the end of the verse, and that the Hebrew retained one of the two very similar verbs, the LXX the other. This was perhaps facilitated by the previous omission of one verb in the text from which both our texts are drawn, the word retained being diversely read. ¦ 6. This verse is closely connected with the, preceding, and formally: appears to be an integral part of the poenvj Duhm and Giesebrecht regard it as such, but Cornill thinks it must be a later addition, and Kent apparently inclines to adopt his opinion. Cornill cannot harmonize the view, which seems to underlie the passage, that Yahweh dwells on Zion and is only there to be sought and found, with the teaching of a prophet who places religion wholly in the heart and reins of men, and says of the Temple that, unless the people mend their ways, it will share the fate of Shiloh., And while the ancient schism between north and south would doubtless give place to a complete reunion, it is precarious to regard this as essentially ecclesiastical. These objections are not without weight ; in particular, the suggestion that to find Yahweh the Ephraimites must go to Zion, is not easy to reconcile with the detachment of religion from material conditions. Yet we should probably regard the verse as authentic. ¦ While religion was for the prophet a personal relation with a personal God, it is very hard to believe that he expected- it to dispense with external expression ; and if it became individual it did not cease to be communal. Christianity is also in its essence a delocalized, de- materialized religion ; ' neither in Jhis mountain nor in Jerusalem shall ye worship the Father,' an utterance more drastic than any from the lips of Jeremiah, more irreconcilable if taken literally with the recognition of any place of worship. It proclaims that God is Spirit, and demands a corresponding worship in spirit and truth. Yet for ; all its inwardness, it always seeks an outward expression 5 and .though such expression has constantly withdrawn the vital force from' the secret 'centre to the surface, that is the fatal exaggeration of an intrinsic quality. Similarly we may hold that while Jeremiah looked forward to a deep spiritual experience for each member of the reunited nation, which should make each independent of all his; fellows for the personal knowledge of God and communion with, Him, he also anticipated that this would not be buried in the individual heart, but would rather seek expression in congenial forms. Indeed, the community of experience would inevitably involve community of worship. But it may still be asked, Would Jeremiah have singled out Zion and spoken as if JEREMIAH 31. 7. JS 85 the watchmen upon the hills of Ephraim %hall cry, Arise ye, and let us go up to Zion unto the Lord our God. [S] For thus sai,th the Lord, Sing with gladness for Jacob, 7 and shout a for the chief of the nations : publish ye, praise tt +Or, at the head there alone God and His people could meet? Would he not rather have said that they would go to their own local sanctuary for their service of thanksgiving? In a regenerated Israel the worship at the high places might be resumed, for the old abuses- would have dis appeared. And we may well believe that Jeremiah .would have favoured this renewal. But this would not have met all the need he felt. If the feud between Judah and Ephraim had been healed, the new national consciousness demanded, in a people for whom the national and the religious were so closely united, a religious expression. The long-sundered tribes must express their spiritual as well as thei* poKtical unity. And - this would most naturally take the form, of a religious reunion at Jerusalem, the capital' of the undivided kingdom. , Not that God dwelt only in Zion or could be found, there alone. Those who spoke as in this verse could equally well have said, Let us go to the sanctuary of oub own city to Yahweh our God. And it is a fine feature in the descrip tion that the Ephraimites should spontaneously resolve to celebrate their happy fortune in Jerusalem. watchmen, The word is often explained as a designation of those whowere set on the hills to Watch for the appearance of the new moon. But the word seems to be used simply in the sense 'to guard,' so that the meaning is rather the keepers of the vine yards or orchards. This gives a good sense, but a slight correction {botsPrim for nots'rim) would- give the meaning 'grape gatherers,' Which would suit the connexion even better. 7-14. These verses, with the possible exception of the last clause of 9, are probably to be assigned to the. post-exilic author to whom we owe the composition of xxx,1 xxxi as a whole. The points of contact with the Second Isaiah are striking, and the deliverance is regarded as on the eve of accomplishment, V. Sing . . . for Jacob. It is not clear to whom the command is addressed ; the LXX reads 'the Lord saith to Jacob • (so Cornill). This may well be correct,, though the Hebrew text is satisfactory enough. for the chief of the nations. The margin is the more natural translation, but it is notfree from objection, and we should probably accept with most recent scholars Duhm's emendation 'mountains' for 'nations' {harim for goyim), 'shout on the top of the mountains ;' the phrase is an imitation of the Second Isaiah's ' let them shout 86 JEREMIAH 31. 8. S ye, and say, O Lord, save thy people, the remnant of 8 Israel. Behold, I will bring them from the north country, and gather them from the uttermost parts of the earth, and with them the blind and the lame, the woman with child and her that travaileth with child together : a great from the top of the mountains' (Isa. xiii. ii), and was further occasioned by the mention of * the mountains of Samaria ' and ' the hills of Ephraim ' in the preceding context. O LORD, save thy people. We should read, with the LXX and Targum, 'The Lord has saved his people :' cf. Isa. xlviii. 20. There is no longer need to implore Yahweh to deliver them, the shout of joy implies that the deliverance is achieved ; the Hebrew text has probably originated from the liturgical use of the word 'Hosanna' (' save now,': according to the usual interpretation, butsee Cheyne's article ' Hosanna ' in the Enc. Bib.). 8. I will bring 1 better ' I am bringing.' The Israelites return not simply from the north, but from the uttermost parts of the earth (for the combination cf. vi. 22) ; this suggests a much wider dispersion than in Jeremiah's time, but cf. Isa. xliii. 6. the blind . . . together: The reference to the blind conies from Isa. xiii. 16, for that to the lame we may compare Isa. xxxv. 6. The latter passage occurs in a chapter which presents other parallels to our passage, but is itself a rate imitative composition largely based on Isa. xl-lv. It is rather improbable that our author was acquainted with it. The latter part is suggested by Isa. xl. 11, but the application is different. hither: i.e. to Palestine, in which the author was writing. Duhm points differently, reading the word for ' Behold ' and con nects it with the next verse, which thus opens as the present verse (so Rothstein). 9. They come wfth tears (1. 4) of penitence (as in the moving passage iii. 21, 'the weeping of the supplications of the children of Israel ') and of joy. The LXX gives quite a different turn to the passage : ' They went forth with weeping, but with consolation will I bring them back,' i.e. they went into exile with sorrow, but I will bring them back with comfort. This yields an excellent sense, and may very well be correct. We have a similar contrast in Ps. cxxvi. 6, but Isa. liv. 7, 8 supplies a parallel to the sense of a more real if less formal kind. In any case it would be well to substitute 'consolations' for 'supplications.' The latter is not quite suitable to the situation, it has probably intruded into the passage under the influence of iii. 21, which, however, deals with the penitence that preceded the restoration (cf. also Zech. xii. 10). The LXX is supported by the great prominence given by the JEREMIAH 31. 9. S 87 company shall they return hither. They shall come with 9 weeping, and with supplications will I lead them : I will a cause them to walk by rivers of waters, in a straight way wherein they shall not stumble : for I am a father to Is rael, and Ephraim is my firstborn. * +Or, bring them unto Second Isaiah to the comforting of Israel, cf. Isa. xl. 1, 2 (which strikes the keynote of Isa. xl-lv), xliii. 1 ff.,xliv. 21-23, xlix. 13, 14 ff., li. 3, 12, Iii. 9, liv. 10. lead them: rightly connected with the preceding words. Hitzig and Graf preferred to connect with what follows, ' They shall come with weeping and with supplications : I will lead them, I will cause them to walk ;' for a similar combination cf. Ps. xliii. 3. For ' lead ' cf. Isa. xl. 11, xlviii. 21, xlix. 10, lv. 12 ; Ps. xxiii. a. rivers of waters: cf. Isa. xii. 18, xliii. 19, 20, xlviii. 21, xlix. 10. The way across the desert was, according to the Second Isaiah, to be relieved of all its peril from thirst and its discomforts, so that Yahweh might lead His people back in security and joy. The author of this passage, like the author of Isa. xxxv, writing with reference to the return from the dispersion, takes up the Second Isaiah's language, though with a less restricted application. Yah weh brings His people to the rivers, as the shepherd his sheep, so that they are not tormented with thirst. a straight way. A better rendering would be ' an even way.' All the roughness of the road is to be smoothed out of it, so that there is nothing against which the weary or the careless should stumble: cf. Isa. xl. 4 (marg.), xiii. 16, also xlv. 2 (with reference to Cyrus), Heb. xii. 13. The author of Isa. xxxv anticipates that a raised way will be specially constructed and reserved for the holy pilgrims to Zion, along which the unclean shall not be permitted to travel, and from which the godless (' fools shall not go to and fro on it') shall be excluded, while it will be too elevated for wild , beasts to climb up to it. for I am . . . firstborn : cf. 20, where also Ephraim is used of the northern tribes, Israel in the narrower sense of the term as contrasted with- Judah. It is not uncommon for Yahweh to be represented as the Father of Israel in the wider sense, and Israel as Yahweh's son, sometimes His firstborn son (Exod. iv. 22, 'Israel is my son, my firstborn '), while in Ps. lxxxix. 27 Yahweh says with reference to the king, ' I also will make him my firstborn.' The thought that Ephraim as contrasted with Judah possesses the right of the firstborn is rare. We read in 1 Chron. v> 1-3 that while Reuben was the firstborn he forfeited his birthright, by his 88 JEREMIAH 31. io. S 10 Hear the word^of the Lord, O ye nations, and declare it in the isles afar off; and say, He that scattered Israel misconduct, to the sons of Joseph. In 2 Sam. xix< 43 the LXX represents the men of Israel (i.e. the ten tribes) as saying t to the. men of Judah ' I am older ' {literally ' firstborn ') ' than thou.' In Hos. xi. 1 Israel must apparently mean! the people as a whole, since the reference is to the Exodus (unless Hosea believed that Judah was not in Egypt), but he continues in 3, 'Yet Fraught Ephraim to go,' as if ' Israel ' and ' Ephraim ' could be used inter changeably. There is much force in Cornill's plea that a post- exilic writer would hardly have spoken of Ephraim in this way, and in his inference th'at this clause is the work of Jeremiah. He regatds it as the continuation of 5 and as effecting the transition to ig ff. With the deletion of 6 it is 'easier to retain the clause. If 6 is retained for Jeremiah, this clause obviously cannot follow upon it, and it is questionable if it follows appropriately on 5 ; apart ffbm the difficulty of interpolating it between 5 and 6. Yet if it is from Jeremiah it cannot have originally belonged to a context so saturated with Deuterb-I'saianic words and ideas. We may then eithertake it as post-exilid like the context in which it stands, in spite of the difficulty that.a Palestinian Jew should accord the pre cedence to Ephraim, or regard it as the work of Jeremiah which is out of its original connexion. In thepresent writer's opinion it would stand' at the close of 20 more fitly than anywhere else in the chapter. 10; The proclamation recalls Isa. xii. 1, xiii. 10, xlix. 1 ; more over in each of these passages ' the isles ' are mentioned, a vdry characteristic phrase of the Second Isaiah, used, with a somewhat indeterminate application, of the coastlands and islands of the Mediterranean, often with a suggestion of distance as here (' isles afar off'). The nations learn that it was Yahweh who had sent His people into exile. Ezekiel regards the glory of Yahweh as compromised not only by the siri of Israel, which stained His repu tation among the heathen, but by the punishment, which, after much forbearance He had inflicted on Israel, inasmuch as this exposed Him to the taunt of the heathen that He was powerless to defend His own people : cf. Isa. Iii. 5. Hence it is a theological necessity for Ezekiel that Yahweh should make plain to the nations by the restoration of Israel that He had been responsible for its captivity, and had not yielded to external necessity. So the author of this passage proclaims to the nations that it was Yahweh, who had scattered His people, who would now bring them back from the dispersion. declare. If the persons addressed iri the two clauses are the same, the nations are first to hear the word, then declare it in JEREMIAH 31. n, 12. S 89 will gather him, and keep him, as a shepherd doth his flock. For the Lord hath ransomed Jacob, and re deemed him from the hand of him that was stronger than he. And they shall come and sing in the height of Zion, and shall flow together unto the goodness of the Lord, the far lands. Perhaps, however, the author meant nothing so definite as this, his language being rhetorical rather than exact. The present writer suspects that the text originally, ran, ' give ear, ye isles afar off.' Cf. Isa. xlix. 1, where the word rendered ' Listen ' is that translated ' Hear ' in our passage, and a synonym (though not the same as here proposed) occurs in the parallel line. Irt any case ' and say * should probably be struck out. will gather . . . flock : based on Isa. xl. 11 ; cf. Jer. xxiii. 3, Ezek. xxxiv. 12 ff. 11. ransomed ... redeemed. The former of these verbs > is not used by Jeremiah with reference to the- people, and once only besides (xv. 21) ; the latter'is not used at all, occurring elsewhere in the book only in 1. '34 : both are favourite expressions of the Psalmists, the latter of the Second Isaiah also. stronger than he : cf. Ps. xxxv. 10, Isa. xlix. 24,25. 12. When the people are thus settled in Palestine they come to Zion to celebrate their deliverance : cf. Isa. li. n (quoted in xxxv.v 10). It is not clear, however, what is meant by the Words ' shall flow together unto the goodness of the Lord.' They might- be a description of a feast on Yahweh's bounty, the fruits of the earth, for which the tribes stream (li. 44, Isa; ii. 2, Mic; iv. 2) to Zion, like the feast upon the tithe, which Deuteronomy had trans ferred from the local sanctuaries to Jerusalem. This is what the parallelism suggests, but the alternative viewthat they stream from Zion after their thanksgiving to enjoy the bounty of Yahweh in their own home suits much better the enumeration which follows. If this is the thought, it must be owned that it is obscurely expressed. Duhm accordingly suggests that 'flow ' is a variant of 'sing,' which he transfers from the former part of the line to take its place, ' and sing concerning the goodness of the Lord.' Cornill agrees that 'flow' is unsuitable, but he retains the present text, taking the word to mean here ' to beam.' It occursin Ps. xxxiv. 5, ( They looked unto him, and were lightened,' and in Isaj lx. 5, where the A.V. rendered ' flow together ' as here, but the R.V. has corrected it to 'be lightened-.' This rendering would not be so suitable here; ' shall be radiantover ' would bnngout the sense. goodness : i. e. bounty ; the word has a material, not a spiritual reference. 90 JEREMIAH 31. 13-15- SJ to the corn, and to the wine, and to the oil, and to the young of the flock and of the herd : and their soul shall be as a watered garden ; and they shall not sorrow any 13 more at all. Then shall the virgin rejoice in the dance, and the young men and the old together : for I will turn their mourning into joy, and will comfort them, and make 14 them rejoice from their sorrow. And I will satiate the soul of the priests with fatness,, and my people shall be satisfied with my goodness, saith the Lord. 15 [J] Thus saith the Lord : A voice is heard in Ramah, wine : i.e.' must ' or ' new wine/ see Driver's additional note on Joel i. -iO {Joel and Amos, pp. 7.9 ff.). The corn, wine, and oil are mentioned together in Hos. ii. 8, 22, and 'the increase of thy kine and the young of thy flock' are added in Deut. vii. 13, similarly Deut. xii. 17. their soul . . . garden : cf. Isa. lviii. 1 1 ; 'watered ' should rather be ' saturated.' The metaphor is far more expressive in the East, where drought is so common. For them the parched wilderness will rejoice and blossom as the rose ; their life will be one of inward tranquillity and refreshment, of outward prosperity and peace ; there will be no retrenchment of whatever is needed to bring the best fruit out-of, them, all their desire will be fulfilled. [The reference to this clause in vol. i, p. 55, is due to an oversight and should be deleted ; the passage is probably not Jeremiah's.] and they . . . at aU : cf. Isa. li. 11. The word rendered 'sorrow' means 'to languish' or 'pine.' Cf. Deut. xxviii. 65. 13. The first clause of the verse draws upon 4, the second has a parallel in Zech. viii. 4, 5. together: i.e. shall rejoice together, but we should probably read, with the LXX, ' shall be glad ' instead of ' together ; ' the difference is merely one of pointing. In any case it is simply the virgin who is represented as dancing ; it need hardly be said that the type of dancing familiar to modern readers is not intended. 14. The soul or appetite of the priests is satiated (literally ' saturated,' Isa. xliii. 24, Ps. xxxvi. 9) with fatness (Isa. Iv. 2, ' let your soul delight itself in fatness '). When Yahweh's bounty had satisfied the people with abundance of corn and wine and oil, of flocks and herds, then their thank-offerings would be proportion ately abundant, and the priest's portion would be very rich. 15-22. Here we meet once more with a genuinepoem by Jere miah, in which the qualities of his genius as the poet of the heart are displayed in full measure. Its subject is the return of JEREMIAH 31. 15. J 91 lamentation, and bitter weeping, Rachel weeping for her Ephraim ; like the earlier poems in this section, it seems to belong to the prophet's first period. Delitzsch considers it to be the prophecy mentioned in xl. 1 as given to Jeremiah after Nebuzara- dan 'had let him go from Ramah,' but not actually recorded. His view is endorsed by Orelli. But the basis is altogether too slender, nothing can safely be huilt on the 'incongruity of xl. 1 with the sequel ; and the reference to Ramah was probably not occasioned by Jeremiah's presence there after the capture of Jerusalem. If we could regard xxx-xxxi as a prophecy uttered by Jeremiah after the fall of Jerusalem, the occasion suggested by Delitzsch would be better worth consideration. But at this time the prophet's thoughts and emotions would be centred on the tragedy which was in progress rather than on the long-continued exile of the northern tribes. ' 15. Cf.Jii.ai. Rachel is 'here represented as weeping for the children she has lost, the northern tribes who have gone into exile. It is no mere poetical figure as a modern reader would naturally regard.it, but the tribal ancestress is stirred from her rest in the grave to wail for the sons of whom she has been bereaved. The shrill -lamentation is heard beyond the limits of her tomb ; and like her husband, when he Relieved that Joseph their son was dead (Gen. xxxvii. 35), she refused to be comforted (cf. Ps. lxxvii. 2). Probably some natural phenomenon had been interpreted, in harmony with popular ideas, of which Jeremiah makes such effective use, as the bitter weeping of Rachel for the fate of her children. The passage does not indeed mention Rachel's grave, and we might think of her as raising her- keen on the heights of Ramah as she surveyed the desolated home of her descendants. But the other view" is more probable. The grave of Rachel is in Gen. xxxv. 16-20, xlviii. 7, placed between Bethel and Ephrath, a little distance from the latter place. Ephrath is identified in these passages with Beth-lehem. This identification underlies the application of our passage to Herod's massacre of the children in Beth-lehem, in Matt; ii. 17, 18. But it can hardly be correct. The site of Rachel's grave is fixed by 1 Sam. x. 2 as ' in the border of Benjamin.' The border intended is that between Benjamin and Ephraim, near Bethel (1 Sam. x. s)j not that between Ben jamin and Judah. Bethel was ten miles, Ramah five miles, north of Jerusalem ; and these indications forbid an identifica tion of the clan-mother's sepulchre with the traditional site, which is four miles south of Jerusalem and one mile north of Bethlehem. Nor would it be a natural situation, since Rachel had no connexion with Judah. It has been held by some eminent scholars, including Noldeke and Dillmann, that there were two traditions touching the site. It is, however, more probable that 92 JEREMIAH 31. 16-18. J children ; she.-refuseth to be comforted for her children, 16 becauBETthey are not. Thus saith the Lord: Refrain thy voice from weeping, an 4 thine eyes from tears : for thy work shall be rewarded,; saith the Lord ; and they 1 7 shall come again frpm the land of the enemy, And there is hope for thy latter end, saith the Lord ; and thy chil- 18 dren shall come again to their own border. I have surely heard Ephraim bemoaning himself thus, Thou hast chas tised me, and I was chastised;' as a calf unaccustomed to they oh: turn thou, me, and I shall be turned; for thou the words 'that is Beth-lehem' in. Gen. xxxv. 15, xlviii. 7 are a gloss, occasioned by the fact that elsewhere- Ephrath is identified with Beth-lehem. Ini that case the Ephrath mentioned in these passages is a place otherwise unknown. 16. To the bitter weeping of Rachelfor the loss of > her children, Yahweh replies in words of gracious comfort, as to the bitter weeping of her children on account of their sins, in iii. qi, 2a. The mother is assured that her work will be rewarded. She has toiled for her children, borne them in sorrow and reared them with untiring labour ; but her pains have been vainly spent, for all she has lavished shehas had no. return. A century ago the death-wail had proclaimed the blighting of all her hopes-, and: still the sound of her lamentation is to be heard in Ramah. And now Yahweh bids her cease from her sorrow ; there will be a reward for her labour, the children of whom she thought herself irretrievably bereaved will come back once more, to brighten the eyes so long dimmed by tears;' 17. This is regarded by several scholars as a variant of 16"; but opinion is divided on the question which is the original. The fact that the LXX gives a much shorter text in 17 may be variously interpreted, and it would be precarious to infer on this ground that 17: is a later addition. It is by no means certain that we 'have jrariants before us, but if so, it would be better to sacrifice 17'than the more distinctive and powerful i6b. " 18. While the another weeps for her bereavement, the children bemoan themselves! for their sin. Ephraim confesses that his chastisement had been deserved; : He had acted like a calf which had not been broken in, undisciplined and self-willed. He has found it hard to kick against the goad, and punishment has taught him the, wisdom and blessedness of obedience. turn ... be turned. This rendering suggests that ' turn ' is used in its spiritual sense. ¦ It would be better to substitute ' I will JEREMIAH 31.: 19, J 93 art the Lord my God. Surely after that I was turned, ig ' — '— ~ 77— ¦ : ; . ¦ 1. : ,: — ; > , ., ,¦ , turn ' for ' I shall be turned,' since to the modern: reader the latter rendering implies that the verb is passive; whereas in older English °- it was used in a neuter sense (see Drives, p. 366); The meaning is then .that if Yahweh will take the initiative in turning, the heart of Ephraihi towards Him, Eprirairri will on Jhis part accept the Divine leading and turn to his God with all his heart. In itself this gives an admirable sense, for in all conversion there is the Divine initia tive met by the human response.' But we seem to have passed beyond this stage here ; Ephraim has already experienced the Divine attraction and responded to it. Accordingly it is better to translate ' bring me back, and'I will return,' i.e. bring me back to my own land (cf. iy. 1). 19. Surely . . . repented: a difficult clause. If the sense of 18 is correctly given in R.V., the obvious meaning of this clause is that Ephraim's repentance followed his return to God. It is no doubt true that as the religious life deepens, repentance for the sinful past also grows deeper, since with widening and purer vision the sense of the guilt and heinousness of sin increases. But it would be inappropriate to import such a consideration here. The repen tance is the first sorrow for sin which precedes the return to God. Obviously the meaning cannot be either that Ephraim repents after his restoration to Palestine. .; Accordingly the text can only be rendered, as several scholars take it, 'after; I turned [from thee] I repented.' This implies a double sense of the word ' turn ' in the same context. For this viii. 4, iii. 12, 14, 22 are quoted. In each of these cases, however, the sense could hardly be misunderstood, whereas here ' after I turned ' takes up ' I will turn' in the pre ceding verse, and irresistibly suggests the same sense. ; Accord ingly the text is suspicious. The LXX reads ' after my captivity,' which involves little change in the Hebrew; The sense is more satisfactory than the expression ; Duhm accepts the reading, but regards it as a marginal gloss, and changes ' instructed ' into 'chastised,' reading 'Surely J repented after I was chastised,/! smote upon my thigh.' This gives a smoother text, buti-the reason for the insertion of such a gloss is far from clear..; Giese brecht prefers the Hebrew to the ¦ LXX and retains ' instrUctedj'- but agrees with Duhm in striking out the words in question as a gloss. Cornill retains the words with a slight correction^and connects with the closing words of 18, but he expunges 'after that I was instructed,' which he regards as philologically dubious. He renders ' For thou art Yahweh my God, and: to foes do I turn. . I repent and smitej' &c. He thus gets rid of what he feels to .be the main objection, the repetition of ' for ' (disguised in R.V. by the rendering of the second by ' Surely ') Which gives two reasons for ' I will turn.' 94 JEREMIAH 31. 20. J I repented; and after1 that :I,was instructed, I smote upon my thigh: I was ashamed,, yea, even confounded, 20 because I did bear the reproach of my youth. Is Ephrar immy dear son? is he-a pleasant child-'? for as' ofterv as | speak against him, I' do earnestly remember him still! therefore my bowels aare troubled for him ; I will surely have mercy upon him, saith the Lord. * Heb. sound smote upon my thigh. This gesture was a sign of the uttermost grief, as we learn from Ezek. xxi. 12. Our equivalent, as Cornill says, would be ' I smote upon my breast.' the reproach of my youth. According to usage this should mean that Ephraim's youth was an occasion of reproach.. But in this context it must mean the reproach for the sins of his youth. Duhm reads simply ' I did bear reproach,' i.e. of exile ; he thinks that ' of my youth ' is the corruption of a gloss meaning ' on account :of my guilt.' Cornill deletes the whole clause. 20. In this beautiful soliloquy of Yahweh, the prophet does not shrink from the boldest anthropomorphism. ¦ Whenever the name of Ephraim passes His lips the tender memory revives in His heart. True, it is with horrorarid with threatening that He must speakiof his conduct, yet; the mention. of his name even in anger revives all the ancient lOve. Moved to amazement by the paradox of Hisi conflicting emotions, He asks Himself trie reason. Is it because Ephraim is His darling child that, in: spite of all his in gratitude' and disobedience, the'old affection surges up irrepressibly at every mention of his name ? ¦ speak against him : better ' speak of him.' The rendering in the text is adopted by several scholars, but although the speaking was -normally of this character, the translation ' against ' unduly narrows the thought. It is not simply the formal denunciation that is intended ; the most casual utterance of the name brings all the happy memories back. Giesebrecht- reads 'am angry with him,' but the present text gives a wholly satisfying sense. earnestly remember. . The meaning is not that whenever the name of Ephraim is utteredj Yahweh remembers him for good, arid resolves on his restoration, but that the old happiness of their relations forces itself on His attention. . therefore . . . upon him. Since Yahweh has not been able to dislodge the love for Ephraim from His heart, or consign the ancient-relationship to oblivion, the affection which yearns over His prodigal son must be satisfied by his restoration to His favour. JEREMIAH 31. 31, 2a. J 95 Set thee up waymarks, make thee guide-posts: set 21 thine heart toward the high way, even the way by which thou wentest : turn again, O virgin of Israel, turn again to these thy cities. How long wilt thou go hither and 22 thither, 0 thou backsliding daughter ? for the Lord hath 21. Set thee . . . 'guide-posts. The injunction is strange. As Cheyne says : ' Siirely the setting up of guide-posts belongs not to the travellers, but to friendly persons who prepare the way for them * {Critica Biblica, p. 70). The word rendered ' guide-posts ' occurs here only, if the reading is correct, since elsewhere1 the same form means ' bitterness ' (as in 15, ' weeping of bitterness '), and that is unsuitable here. The sense required by the parallelism is ' sign-posts,' and we may either assign this meaning to it, or, following the LXX, which seems to give a transliteration rather than a translation, read timmorim. This word means 'palm- trees,' but since a cognate word is used in x. 5 in the sense ' pillar ' (so R.V. marg. , see note), a similar sense is assumed here. The erection of waymarks is often interpreted as designed to save stragglers, who may have strayed from the main body, from getting lost. Duhm thinks Israel is bidden set up the waymarks in spirit ; remembering the path' by which she had- come into exile, She should in thought erect the sign-posts to guide her return. But this, though favoured by the -following Clause, is rather artificial, and 'the more usual inferpretatiori is precarious. For ' waymarks ' Rothstein ¦ (in Kittel's Biblia Hebraica) prefers 'watchmen' {tsophtm), and is very dubious about the suggested emendation of the parallel term, though he accepts it in Kautzsch's translation-. It is perhaps best to acquiesce in the usual view as to the general^ drift of the passage without placing any undue confidence in the correctness of the text. set thine heart ¦ . . wentest. Let Israel turn her thoughts again to the road, by which she had travelled the bitter road to exile ; now she may think on it with delight, for- it is the way which will lead her home. these thy cities. The writer is obviously in Palestine. 22. To the exhortation in the preceding verse, the' prophet adds what is at Once remonstrance and appeal. How long will Israel hesitate to believe and act upon the gracious promise ? She flutters hither and thither in her indecision, let her strike out a clear undistracted course I In such a passage the epithet ' back sliding ' strikes "a jarring note. The LXX reads ' dishonoured ; ' the best correction is^Cornill's • despoiled ' (Jiashshediidah) which involves the change of two consonants. < for the LOBD ... a man. This passage is very difficult and 96 JEREMIAH 31. a».: J created a new thing, in the earth, A woman shall encom pass a man.. .; — — ii'.lj ,: ,,i,.J — i ¦ . .',- ,' {'. ¦,,.- ,/- 11 in I — .>,/¦: ¦-. I" ¦ has ; occasiqned much, i djSjCussiqnJ :, It ! must-, describe': something wholly out .of the ordinary course, something unprecedented in nature or human experience (cf. Isa'.' xliii. 19, Nurri: xvi. 30).'' If the "expression is borrowed from a popular proverb, as is commonly supposed, the point will be that Yahweh dwiM»bjring the proverbially impossible to- pass.-, Many think the meaning is ' A woman shall protect a man,' and this is itself variously explained s Israel shall protect Yahweh, i. e. His Temple in which He .dwells ; or the Messiah is protected by his mother; pr less 1 obviously unlikely, : the land will be so peaceful that the woman will.no longer need protection from the man, but will be able to accord it to him, but in such happy conditions what protection does the man need? Others take the clause to mean that the woman will cling about the. man ;, Israel will no longer, hold Yahweh at a distance, , but seek Him and cleave to Him., The new thing is that the, woman woos the man, inverting the normal relationship. But this idoes, not well harmonize With the fact, that it is Yahweh w,hp. takes :the initiative and, creates a new thing. Nor does this any more than the previous rendering justify the description with which the .clause is introduced. Such an unparalleled event as this demands, seems to be expressed: by Ewald's translation, 'A woman shall be turned into a> man.' This is somewhat precarious as a rendering of the present text, but Duhm by a trifling emendation has removed this objection. He .takes it, however, as a witty gloss, by a reader, who on account of the language is to be assigned to the post-exilic period. The point of the annotation is, he thinks, that Israel, which :had been spoken of earlier in the passage as a male, is, now represented as a female. But, as Cornill points out, this would be more than a trivial witticism,; /introduced ,with the statement: that Yahweh was creating a new thing, it would be apiece of blasphemy. Besides, such changes, of representation are too common in Hebrew poetry for such a gloss to have any point. If thisitranslationis right, the point must be that Israel, the weak, timid,. irriesolut-e woman (of course it is an Oriental who is writing), will he tuiinecjVinto a strong brave man,.,. If the, Hebrew text is retained in its: present or in Duhm's slightly emended [form, this, seems to be the best interpretation. Only it may be questioned whether it is really satisfactory. For while the fulfilment of the. promise,; taken in its literal sense, would be unprecedented indeed, this would not be 50, in the metaphorical sense here intended. Accordingly a question arises as to the correctness of the text. The LXX reads ' men- shall go about in safety,' but so tame a promise is not so JEREMIAH 31. 2?, 24. S 97 [s] Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Yet 23 again shall they use this speech in the land of Judah and in the cities thereof, when I shall a bring again their cap-. tivity : The Lord bless thee, O habitation of justice, O mountain of holiness. And Judah and all the cities 24 "- Or, return to good as the Hebrew, nor' is the emendation of the Hebrew based upon it by Schmidt {Enc. Bib. 2384) acceptable. Something of a more portentous character would be expected. In the parallel passage which speaks of Yahweh as doing a new thing (Isa. xliii. ig), it is the transformation of nature involved in making ' a way in the wilderness, and rivers in the desert.' The most satisfying sense, as Cheyne has seen {Critica Biblica, pp. 70, 71), would be yielded by a text which similarly assured the captives that Yahweh would miraculously remove the physical obstatles to their return. His emendation, however, ' the Negeb shall change as (into) the Arabah ' (cf. Zech. xiv. 10), while closer to the traditional text than many of his conjectures, is nevertheless a good deal removed from it, and depends on his North Arabian theory. The present writer has no suggestion to make which he can regard as satisfactory, and must content himself with pointing out the difficulties which attach to other solutions. 23-26. To the prediction of Ephraim's restoration a prediction of Judah's similar restoration is appended. Probably this is not the work of Jeremiah, but belongs to the author of xxx, xxxi. It apparently presupposes the downfall of the Southern Kingdom ; the reference to Jerusalem as the ' mountain of holiness ' is not what we expect from Jeremiah, though the prophet does not describe it thus himself, but simply says that others will so designate it; and the points of contact with 12-14 suggest that the same view should be taken of both passages. 23. Yet again : implying that at the time this was written such speech could not be used, since the land was a desolation and the Temple a ruin. bring1 again their captivity : see note on xxix. 14. habitation of justice: the land of Judah or the capital is an abode in which righteousness dwells. 'Habitation' is literally 'homestead.' mountain of holiness. The holy mountain may be either the mountain land of Judah, or Jerusalem, or simply the Temple hill. The last is perhaps the most probable. For the whole verse cf. Zech. viii. 3. 24. The inhabitants of Judah will be able to practise the agricultural and pastoral life without any fear of the spoiler. II H 9V8- JEREMIAH 31. 25-27- S thereof shall dwell therein together} the husbandmen, 25 and they that go about with flocks. ¦ For I have satiated the weary soul, and every sorrowful soul have I replen- 26 ished. , Upon this I awaked, and beheld; and; my sleep 2? was sweet unto me. Behold, the days come, saith the 25. In this lovely verse the promises of 12 and 14 are recalled. The weary soul is refreshed, the pining (see npte on 12) soul replenished. i;r 26. This is a difficult verse, .The views, which have found favour with many commentators, that either God or the people is represented as speaking seem to be universally abandoned. The author of the verse is referring to himself. : Often the verse has been explained that when the prophet awoke from the sleep in which the foregoing revelation had been communicated to him, his dream seemed sweet to him as he looked back upon it. Such a statement could not well have come from Jeremiah, who did not recognize that God revealed Himself in dreams. But the words ', and beheld ' are not easy to harmonize with this interpretation. The ' sleep ' or prophetic ecstasy is the condition to which vision in the fuller sense belongs, but here the prophet speaks as if with, his' awakening true vision returned. , We can hardly escape the conclusion then that the writer is contrasting the dream with the stern realities of actual life.; He means that when he returns to the hard facts, when the glow dies down and, as we put it, reason resumes its sway, the gorgeous fancies of the, night pale in the cold light of day. Plainly it is not the prophet himself who utters this confession of disillusion. It is one of his readers, who, not necessarily in a mocking mood as Duhm believes, but rather with the deep yearning that would fain hope against hope, confesses how attractive the prospect is, but how unlikely of realization^ Cornill thinks that the verse stood originally after 22, and that ' the isolated couplet ' 25 should be struck out. Our verse would then refer to the prophecy of Ephraim's return in 1-22. He is inclined to think that its present position is due not to its original connexion with 23 ff., which would have been too slight for such a conclusion, but to the interpretation of these verses as standing in close connexion- with 22 and the words of blessing on Jerusalem in 23 as spoken by the returned Ephraimites. A reader- who was familiar with the hatred of Jew and Samaritan in the later period might well regard such anticipations of friendly - relations as altogether too good to be true. ,2?-30. This passage raises critical difficulties. It falls into two parts (a) 27, 28, (b) 29, 30. The, former may conceivably come from Jeremiah, though its connexion with 24 does not favour JEREMIAH 31. 28. S 99 Lord, that I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah. with the seed of man, and with the seed of beast. . And it shall come to pass, that like as I have watched 28 this, and it is written rather from the standpoint of the author of xxx, xxxi, dwelling on the union of Israel and Judah. The latter it is not easy to connect with Jeremiah. It is true that the proverb quoted was current among the people at this time, since the use of it is attacked by Ezekiel (xviii. 2, 3). But Ezekiel repudiates it as intrinsically false, and devotes a lengthy refutation to it ; the writer of our passage seems to regard it as justifiable under the present conditions, but as inapplicable and uncalled for in the bright future to which he looks forward. Such a judgement we cannot easily reconcile with what we know of Jeremiah, a man who would have seen as clearly and felt as strongly as Ezekiel the essential injustice of a moral government which could be justly described in such a proverb. 27. Behold, the days come, saith the LORD. This formula, which we have met with previously in this section (xxx. 3), occurs with unusual frequency in this context (27, 31, 38). . In three of these passages it introduces what is probably a non-Jeremianic oracle. But we ought not to permit this to prejudice us against the Jeremianic origin of the prophecy of the New Covenant. I will sow . . . beast. The land of Palestine is at present thinly peopled. But Yahweh will break up His fallow ground and plant it with seed Of man and beast, so that both may abound. The metaphor recalls Ezek. xxxvi. 9^-11, Hos. ii. 23, though the point in the latter passage is different. Long after the return from captivity the complaint was made of the sparse population of the country, as we learn from the very striking passage Isa. xxvi. 16-19, which probably belongs to the latter part of the fourth century b. c. In that passage the repeopling of the depleted land is anticipated through a resurrection of pious Israelites. On those bodies buried in the earth the life-giving dew of God will descend, and they will come forth from the ground as the buried seed awakens to life and comes forth under the same quickening influence. Thus the old promises of innumerable posterity made to the patriarchs and repeated in Hos. i. 10, Ezek. xxxvi, 9-11 will be fulfilled. the house of Israel and the house of Judah. The LXX reads simply ' Israel and Judah.' The point of the passage is that Israel and Judah, whose future blessedness has been separately described in the previous part of the prophecy, are now united : cf. iii. 18, 1. 4 ; Isa. xi. 11-14 ; Ezek. xxxvii. 1:5-24 ; Hos. i. if. 28. This verse is obviously intended to recall the terms of H 3 ioo JEREMIAH 31. 29. S over them to pluck up and to break down, and to over throw and to destroy, and to afflict ; so will I watch over 29 them to build and to plant, saith the Lord. In those Jeremiah's commission (i. 10) and his vision of the almond tree (i. 11, 12). 29. The popular proverb here quoted was current in the dark days of Judah's tragedy, as we learn from Ezek, xviii. 2, and the sentiment to which it gives such pungent expression is found in Lam. v. 7. It represents an antagonism to the ancient doctrine of solidarity, which had long been unchallenged in theory and carried , out in practice. This doctrine had affirmed the mutual responsibility of the members of the group which formed its social unit. The individual had but little independent significance. If a man killed one who belonged to another clan, the individual aspect of the case was unimportant in comparison with the collective. The vital fact was that one clan had shed the blood of another clan, and the vengeance was directed not so much at the actual offender as at his clan as a whole. If a man broke the law or violated some taboo, then it was considered quite just that his family should suffer with him in expiation of his transgression. Achan's sons and daughters, and even his possessions, were stoned and burned along with the culprit himself (Joshua vii. 24, 25). The whole city of Nob was smitten with the edge of the sword, 'men and women, children and sucklings, and oxen and asses,' because Ahimelech the priest had helped David (1 Sam. xxii." 16-19). Saul's own children, and grandchildren were hanged up before Yahweh: to remove a famine caused hy Saul's slaughter of the Gibeonites in violation of Joshua's oath (2 Sam. xxi. 1-9). With the develop ment of the social and political organization and the break-up of the older clan system, the cruel injustice of such treatment was more and more recognized. A noteworthy advance was made when Amaziah slew the conspirators who had slain his father, but spared their children (2 Kings xiv. 5, 6). The Deuteronomic Code explicitly enjoined that the fathers shpuld not be put to death for the children or the children for the fathers, but every man for " his own sin (Deut. xxiv. 16). And if conscience revolted in the sphere of the relations between man and man, it was natural that it should do so in that of the relations between man and God. It had seemed to an earlier age quite unexceptionable that God should visit the sins of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation. And still with bitter indignation it was urged tliat so in fact He acted. The very form in which the protest, was ex pressed, reveals how deep the people felt the injustice to be. Their ancestors had sinned, no doubt, but what had their trans gression been ? It was as if a man had eaten sour grapes. In the JEREMIAH 31. 3o, 31. SJ ioi days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge. But 3° every one shall die for his own iniquity : every man that eateth the sour grapes, his teeth shall be set on edge. [J] Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will 3* course of nature the effect of this would not simply be confined to the man himself, but it would be of the most transient character, and would leave no permanent mark behind it. Such had been the intrinsic quality of the fathers' sin as their children judged it. But in the moral government of God how unnatural had His treat ment of the transgression been ! The penalty had been transferred from ancestors to descendants, from the guilty to the innocent:. And it was a penalty for a transgression of so trivial a character, which had properly no serious consequences and did no perman ent moral damage. Thus they criticized God'for undue interference with the chain of cause and effect ; He had diverted the punishment from the guilty to the innocent, and He had treated the offence as far more grave than it was in reality. This criticism Ezekiel set himself to meet. He does not attempt to vindicate the truth of the traditional view, he affirms in the most uncompromising form the doctrine of individual responsibility. ' The soul that sinneth, it shall die,' it and no other. While he fully agrees that merit and guilt, reward and punishment, should not be transfer able, he repudiates the charge that the ways of Yahweh had been unequal. The proverb was false in point of fact ; his own genera tion was not suffering from the entail of ancestral guilt, but reaping the harvest of its own transgression ; moreover it rested on an estimate of sin which was altogether too light-hearted. The extreme form in which Ezekiel stated his position needed modification : there was a real problem, which in his zeal for God's honour he refused to see. It is noteworthy that the present passage differs from Ezekiel's discussion, in that it seems to recognize that the proverb has had and still has its justification, but that m the happy future retribution will follow the lines of strict justice. set on edge : literally blunted. 30. his own iniquity. In this period there may still be sin ot such a character as to merit death. 31-34. We now reach the great prophecy of the New Coven ant. Its Jeremianic origin was questioned by Movers, who attributed it to the Second Isaiah. As already mentioned (p. 68), Stade was the first to reject the authenticity of xxx, xxxi, including this prophecy, but without assigning reasons ; while Smend, who did assign reasons for the rejection of the whole, did not go into the question of this passage at any length, and so far as he did 102 JEREMIAH 31. 31. J make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with so was answered by' Giesebrecht in the first edition of 'his com mentary. In his article ' Covenant ', in the Encyclopaedia Biblica, Schmidt relegated the whole section to the period of the Graeco- Persian War, but neither in this article nor in those on ' Jeremiah ' did he give any adequate proof of this position, but contented himself with a reference to Smend's discussion. A very search ing investigation was devoted to the question by. Duhm. He was driven from the , acceptance of the authenticity only with great reluctance. Not unnaturally the surrender of it involved a much lower estimate of its value. The same phrases bear different meanings on different lips. What a later scribe, zealous for the Law, intended by this oracle seemed to him something far inferior to what Jeremiah would have meant by it ; the criticism thus controls to some extent the exegesis, and the result is to belittle the passage. Instead of the splendid climax of Jeremiah's teach ing, epoch-making as scarcely any other pre-Christian conception, we had the dwarfed ideal of a post-exilic legalist, devoid alike of originality and historical significance. It is among the chief merits of Cornill's commentary that it contains a brilliant refuta tion of Duhm's arguments, which it is to be hoped may prove a final vindication of the authenticity. No student of Jeremiah to whom it is accessible should fail to read this masterly argument. An article by Prof. W. J. Moulton in the . Expositor for April, 1906, should also be mentioned. Marti firmly maintains the Jeremianic origin in the last edition (1907) of his History of the Religionof Israel. Prof. Cheyne has now definitely assigned the passage to a supplementer {The Two Religions of Israel, pp. 60, 61). Duhm says that if genuine the passage would be very important, since it would express the antithesis between the, prophetic and Deuteronomic conception of religion. But this passage does not, he proceeds, contain such a contrast ; it promises a new ^coven ant ' but not a new 'law,' only an inward conformity of the people with the Law ; and it puts the stress: on the good results which this will havefor thepeople, but betrays no need for a higher kind of religion. If one is not dazzled by the expressions ' new covenant,' 'write on the heart/ the passage says no more about the individual than what Deuteronomy already regarded as possible (xxx. 11 ff.)and desirable (vi. 6-8), that each should be familiar with the Law and loyally obey it, , A still greater objection is the bad, cumbersome, slipshod style, the prominence of such phraseology as is dear to the supplementers, the complete absence of original figures of speech, which are to be found even in the shortest poems of Jeremiah. The other criticisms made by Duhm are best dis cussed as they arise in the detailed interpretation of the passage, JEREMIAH 31. 32. J 103 the house of Judah: not . according to the covenant that 32 but it is desirable to examine at this point those which have just been mentioned. ,. , The present writer has argued (vol. i, pp.. 12- 14), that the oppo sition to Deuteronomy felt by Jeremiah was by no means so fundamental as several scholars, including both Duhm and Cornill, have asserted. But leaving this question aside, the Old Covenant was for Jeremiah that made by God with Israel at Sinai. And this, as Cornill has shown, had for its content and basis the Decalogue: This is clear from the description, given in Jer. vii. The same is true of the present passage, where there is a clear contrast between the law written with God's finger on, the tables of stone and the law written by God in the heart. Deuteronomy accordingly does' not come into consideration at all ; and the need for a new law to supersede the Decalogue would not have . been felt by Jeremiah. The New Covenant is new not in the sense that it introduces a new moral and religious code, but that it confers a new and inward power of fulfilling the code already given. The Law ceases to be a standard external to the individual, it has become an integral part of his personality. The second objection is not without force. But the oracle may have been touched by supplementers, as so much of Jeremiah's prophecies, and the form in which it was first written down' may have been due to Baruch. Even so not the substance alone, which is the vital matter, but also the form is largely Jeremianic. The vagueness, of which Duhm complains, disappears when the passage is taken out of its isola tion and set in its context in Jeremiah's teaching as a whole. The charge that it is lacking in original poetic images is not weighty, unless we unjustifiably restrict Jeremiah's authentic utterances to the compass assigned them by Duhm ; and for daring originality the thoughts of the passage are not surpassed even by any utterance of Jeremiah himself. We may pass then from these general considerations to the detailed study of the passage, feeling that so far nothing has been urged against its authenticity that need shake our confidence in it. The thought of the passage has been expounded and its signific ance set forth in the- Introduction to this commentary (vol. i, pp. 43-48), and the writer would be glad if the student would read the notes which' follow in connexion with that more general discussion (see also his notes on Heb. viii. 8-13). 31. a new covenant. On the Hebrew idea of ' covenant 'the Bible Dictionaries and histories of the religion of Israel may be consulted. The term means generally a compact or agreement made between two parties, though in some cases it is simply imposed by one on the other, or may be a promise to which con ditions are not attached. In antiquity the religion of a people 104 JEREMIAH 31. 3a. J I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by Was -something that had grown with its growth, it had come down from immemorial antiquity. The relation between a clan and its deity was a natural and inevitable relation. The religion of Israel constituted an exception to this, in that it was a coven ant religion. In Other words, the relation between Yahweh and Israel was neither inevitable nor compulsory. Yahweh, free to choose any nation, chose Israel to be His people, and Israel took Yahweh to be its God, promising obedience to His commands. This covenant was ratified at Sinai. But Israel's inveterate dis obedience had released Yahweh from His obligation. Hence the old Sinaitic covenant was annulled by the dissolution of Israel's national existence. But while the Old Covenant was thus abolished, the ties which bound Yahweh, to His 'people could not be so readily snapped. Hence a New Covenant will replace the old, but a covenant which will provide against the failure that had overtaken its predecessor, and infaUihly ensure its own permanent validity. . The expression ' to make a covenant ' is properly ' to cut a covenant,' perhaps derived from the custom mentioned in xxxiv. 18 (see note). with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah. In view of 33, where ' the house of Israel ' alone is mentioned, it is probable that we should regard 'and . ... Judah' as an insertion. Jeremiah meant by ' Israel ' the whole people including Judah. The author of these chapters, taking ' Israel ' to mean the northern tribes, adds the reference to Judah, in conformity with his desire to emphasize the restoration not of these only but also of Judah. The omission of the words also restores the Qina rhythm. It is with the nation, not with the individual, that the New Covenant is made. 32. The prophet proceeds to define the New Covenant, first negatively in this verse, and then positively in 33, 34. It is not to be like the covenant made at the Exodus,, the Sinaitic covenant. In what respect it was different has been already explained (p. 103). The verse is cumbrously expressed, but it would impoverish the passage to strike it out. The contrast with the Old Covenant needed to be brought out and its failure explicitly mentioned, in order to justify the making of a New Covenant. Cornill lightens the 1 style and restores a regular Qina measure by omitting ' to bring them out of the land of Egypt ' and ' saith the Lord.' Giesebrecht omits the latter, but in the former case strikes out simply ' the land of,' though he inserts ' aforetime ' after ' I made.' This, while less satisfactory in form, is better in substance. Cornill thinks that the definite mention of the Exodus was unnecessary, since it was quite clear what was intended. But there was a possibility of misunderstanding, which is precluded by this clause. JEREMIAH 31. 33. J 105 the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt ; a which my covenant they brake, although I was ban husband unto them, saith the Lord. But this is the covenant 33 a Or, forasmuch as they brake my covenant b Or, lord over them in the day. Naturally Jeremiah does not mean the day on which the Hebrews left Egypt, any more than in vii. 22 (see note), but at that period. took them by the hand. The metaphor is of a child guided by his father in his faltering steps; it is a beautiful picture of Yahweh's gentleness and loving care : cf. Hos.xi. 1-4, which may have been in the prophet's mind, Isa. xl. 11, xii. 13, xiii. 6, li. 18. I was an husband. The first person is. emphatic, as is the third person in the preceding clause. The verb is found also in iii. 14, where it certainly means ' I am a baal,' that is, both lord and husband (see the note). This does not yield a good sense here, and some have wished to give the word the meaning ' to loathe,' ' to reject.' This is philologically dubious, but the sense is that required, and a very slight alteration in the Hebrew {ga'alli for ba'alti) proposed by Giesebrecht gives it. Probably the LXX, which is quoted in Heb. viii. 9 (see the notes on that passage), read this verb, so also the Syriac. We should accordingly sub stitute here ' and I abhorred them.' Duhm accepts this emendation and draws the inference that Jeremiah cannot have -written the passage. The rejection must refer to the exile, but a writer who speaks of this as a rejection of the ' fathers ' must himself have lived long afterwards. But this is to overlook the fact that the ' fathers ' are in the first instance the generation that came out of Egypt, whom Jeremiah would rightly so describe, since they belonged to the distant past. If we are to press his language, we should be more justified in referring the pronouns which follow (' they,' ' them ') to the Hebrews of the Exodus than to the Jews of the Captivity. But obviously Jeremiah is not speaking with such strictness ; he looks at the nation as having a continuous life, and while the ' fathers ' refers at first to the Hebrews in, the wilderness, the prophet passes in the next clauses to the thought of the people throughout its history of rebellion which finally drove Yahweh to the last extremity. The rejection is not to be identified with the exile, it is its antecedent. Besides, the exile of, the northern tribes was very present to Jeremiah's mind, and that , had taken place a good deal more than a century . earlier. We are accordingly not justified in drawing, the inference that the passage must have been written long after Jeremiah's time. 33. Now follows the positive description of the New Covenant. 106 JEREMIAH 31. 33- J that I will make with the house of Israel after those days( saith the Lord ; I will put my law in their inward parts, Yahweh will put His law in the inward parts and write it on the heart. Duhm raises the objection, Why did not God do this at the first ? Is He not to blame for the failure of the Old Covenant ? Cornill points out that such an objection banishes the idea of history, on which elsewhere Duhm himself lays such stress, and we might as well ask why God did not send Jesus at the Creation instead of in the fullness of time. A second objection is that we receive no explanation of the writing of the jaw on the heart. The writer' does not speak of a new or a better law, or any trans formation of man's nature. He simply says Yahweh will accomplish it. But such an objection is valid only if the present passage is taken by itself and treated as the author's complete message. If Jeremiah was its author, then it stands in a very rich context, which amply supplies the explanation of what is here left unexplained. > He had elsewhere spoken of the circumcision of the heart (iv. 4), he had communicated the Divine promise ' I will give them an heart to know me, that I am the Lord,' and announced their return to Him with their whole heart (xxiv. 7). On this point what is said in the Introduction should be read (vol. i, pp. 43, 44). The 'new birth,' the 'new heart,' as the Gospel proclaims them, are really implied in this great' saying. It is not the author's ideal that the nation should become a people of legalists and ritualists, familiar with all the regulations of the ceremonial law and instinctively obeying them. It is rather that in the regenerate personality there should reside the eternal principles of religion and morality as the spring of iall action. , The Jeremianic origin of the passage is attested by the Second Isaiah's reference (Isa. li. 7) to 'the people in whose heart, is my , law,' which .seems to depend on this verse. I will put . . . write it. ' Instead of an external law engraven on tables of stone, there will be the law written on tables that are hearts of flesh. An external code must always he rigid and inelastic ; frequently it affords no guidance to conduct, and its control acts as art irritant to the natural man. The law written on the heart implies an inner principle which can deal with each case of conscience sympathetically as it arises, and can ensure the fulfilment of its behests, because it , has, brought the inner life into perfect harmony, with itself. The heart, and thus the whole life, has with the engraving of the law upon it, itself become new. The heart embraces not only the emotional and ethical but also the intellectual life. And thus, by being trans formed from a foreign ruler into a native and inward impulse, the law gains the power of self-fulfilment.* (Quoted from the editor's JEREMIAH 31. 34. J 107 and in their heart will I write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people: and they shall 34 teach no more every man -his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least ' of them unto the commentary on The Epistle to the Hebrews in The Century Bible, pp. 171, 172). and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Such had indeed been the relationship which the Old Covenant had been designed to establish (Exod. xix. 5; 6, 2 Sam. vii. 24) ; but God's purpose had been ultimately thwarted by Israel's disobedience. This had created a serious problem for: earlier prophets, who solved in various ways the intolerable contradiction involved in the relationship of a holy God to a sinful people : Jeremiah solves it by this doctrine of the New Covenant. ; The people, not the individual, remains with him as with his predecessors the religious unit. ' But the advance he makes is that Israel's side of the covenant isuperfectly fulfilled, because religion has become a matter for the individual. While it was regarded exclusively as national, it was impossible for it to be other than superficial and external. By carrying it into the heart, it became personal,. and because each individual was righteous, the aggregate of individuals that formed the nation must be righteous too. Thus we may say that individualism guaranteed the reality of national religion. But by this transformation in the idea of religion the national limitations were really transcended, and since the moral and spiritual are the universal, with Jeremiah's doctrine of the New Covenant universalism was born. The State could perish, and sacrifice be brought to an end, but religion had been detached from these accidents, and could therefore survive them.' {Hebrews in The Century Bible, p. 172*) 34. As things are, the knowledge of Yahweh, is derived from external sources, so that one man communicates it to another, and he in 'turn to a third. But in the blessed time to come, this knowledge will be the property of each, an inward possession, implanted by God Himself, who gives to all, from the least to the greatest, a heart to know Him (xxiv. 7). And this knowledge is not just the knowledge of the law, even in the highest sense,!still less does the prophet mean that each is to become an expert in all the minute regulations of the ceremonial law. Such would, indeed, be an ideal unworthy of Jeremiah. But happily we know from himself what the phrase 'to know me,' so often on his lips (ii. 8, iv. 22, ix. 3, 6, 24, xxii. 16, xxiv. 7), really meant for him. In xxii. 16 he speaks of Josiah as evincing his knowledge of 108 JEREMIAH 31. 35. JS greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin will I remember no more. 35 [s] Thus saith the, Lord, which giveth the sun for a light Yahweh in that ' he judged the cause of the poor and needy ; ' and still more definitely in ix. 24 he describes the knowledge' of God, which is man's true glory, to be the insight into His character : 'let him that glorieth glory in this, that he' under- standeth, and knoweth me, that I am the Lord which exercise lovingkindness, judgement, and righteousness, in the earth : for in these things I delight.' Such an insight into the character of Yahweh, it is the Divine purpose to implant in every man. And a character and conduct on the ipart of each, corresponding to Yahweh's own character and conduct, will be the inevitable out come of this gracious dealing with them. We have an echo of this verse in Isa. liv. 13, ' And all: thy children shall be taught of the Lord.' j I will forgive ... no more. Naturally, ideal relations could not be restored while the sin of Israel remained unpardoned and ever present to the Divine consciousness; The disturbing element must be removed, an amnesty in the fullest sense of the terra must be proclaimed. Clemency will forgive, but, a strange paradox, Omniscience will forget 1 35-37. This section is regarded by several, though not, as is sometimes said, by all critics as a later addition. Movers and Hitzig attributed it to the Second Isaiah ; this view was rejectedby Graf, who, however, thought that 35, 36 seemed like a supplementary insertion, 37 like a marginal gloss. Giesebrecht, Kuenen, Stade, Cornill, Kent, and Gillies treat it as late ; Duhm, it need hardly be said, regards it as non-Jeremianic, but he also assigns it to another author than 31-34- It is, nevertheless, attributed to Jeremiah by Orelh, KOnig, Buhnerincq, Rothstein, Koberle, and apparently Driver. In the LXX37 is placed before 35, but it would be too hasty o judge the wholepassage on this ground.; at most it points to a cer- tarn probability that 37 was originally a marginal gloss, which has been taken into the text, now at this point now at that: Verse 37 is also, alike in style and content, scarcely on Jeremiah's level ; the measuring of heaven and searching out of its foundations has no Wi C^.nexion> as Giesebrecht points out, with the rejection of israei. itie strenuous nationalism in the whole passage is scarcely lavourable to its authenticity. It is true that Jeremiah was a fervent patriot, but he did riot put patriotism in the first place, and the very strong, one might almost say exaggerated, expression here given to the thought is not what we expect from -him. Further the points of contact with the Second Isaiah are very striking. Giesebrecht quotes as parallels to the form and content of 3s the JEREMIAH 31.! 36. s I0Q by day, and the ordinances of- the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which astirreth up the sea, that the waves thereof roar ; the Lord of hosts is his name : If these ordinances depart from before me, saith the Lord, 36 a Or, stilleth the sea, when b"c. . See Isa. li. 15. following : Isa. xl. 12, 26, xiii. 5, xliv, 24 ff., xlv. 7, 18. The present writer cannot attach the same weight to these as several critics do, since he does not agree that prophetic passages Which speak of Yahweh's work in creation or the rule of nature are necessarily later (see notes on v. 20-22). For the words ' If these ordinances depart from before me' Giesebrecht compares Isa. liv. 9, 10, though this is not a very close parallel. The words ' which stirreth up the sea, that the waves thereof roar ; the Lord of hosts is his name ' are found in precisely the same form in Isa. li. 15. The unmetricat style is also urged against the passage. It must of course be remembered that the verses are prejudiced by their position. It is difficult to believe that Jeremiah can' have uttered them as the climax to the prophecy of the New Covenant. If it were necessary to hold that they were written for their pres ent position, it would be better to assign them to the compiler of xxx, xxxi. But if they are an independent fragment the case is not so clear. The fact that these chapters contain a great deal of secondary matter, the probably later origin of 37 which is closely connected with 35, 36, the nationalist character of the passage, and to some extent the points of contact with II Isaiah, incline the editor to regard 33, 36, as well as 37, as non-Jeremianic, but he cannot pretend to consider the arguments for this position as in any way conclusive. 35. the ordinances of the moon and of the stars. We should probably read, with the LXX, simply ' the moon and the stars.' The mention of ' the ordinances ' with reference to moon and stars and not also to the sun is strange. stirreth up the sea. The verb is used in this sense here and in Isa. li. 15, and also according to the majority of commentators in Job xxvi. 12, though it is not improbable that in the latter passage we should adopt the margin ' stilleth ' (see the editor's note). the LORD of hosts is his name. A similar formula occurs in all three of the ' creation passages ' in Amos (iv. 13, v. 8, ix. 6), which are regarded by many scholars as later insertions. 36. these ordinances : i. e. the Divine decrees which the heav enly bodies obey, which not one of them dare disobey (Isa. xl. 26). Just as soon should those laws fail which hold the universe to gether as an ordered system, as Israel's national existence be finally destroyed. no JEREMIAH 31. '#-4°- S then the seed of Israel also shall cease fromibeing a na- 37 tiori ^before me for ever. Thus saith the Lord : If heaven above can be measuredy and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, then will I also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have , done, saith the Lord. 38 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that the city shall be built to the Lord from the tower of Hananel 39 unto the gate of the. corner. And the measuring line shall yet go out straight onward unto the hill Gareb, and 4o shall turn about unto Goah. And the whole valley of 37. The point in the comparison is the impossibility of the events happening. As little as man can measure the expanse of heaven or work down to the bases on which the world's fabric rests, so little can God cast Israel away on account of its sin. This is hardly in the manner of such a prophet as Amos, whd definitely contemplated the final rejection of Israel for its sin. 38-40. This is anti-climax 'indeed. It is hardly likely, that a prophet such as Jeremiah would have concerned himself with the future boundaries of Jerusalem in this minute way. In the post-exilic period the people were much preoccupied with ques tions such as this and the restoration of the fortifications. The closest parallel is to be found in Zech. xiv, which may even have suggested our passage. >'¦ The extent of the city is not the only point: of. interest to the- author ; he emphasizes also its dedication to Yahweh, both at the beginning and the end of the oracle. 38. the tower of Hananel. This is similarly mentioned in Zech. xiv. 10. Its position is defined by Neh. iii. 1, xii. 39 as at the north-east corner of the city, while the gate of the corner, which is also mentioned in Zech. xiv. 10, seems from 2 Kings xiv. r3, 2 Chron. xxvi. 9, to have been at the north-west corner. This verse accordingly indicates the limits of the north wall of the city from east to west. 39. the hill Gareb and Goah are mentioned nowhere else, Presumably we start from the north-west corner and turn south (Giesebrecht reads ' southward ' instead of ' straight onward,' per- haps-rightly)-or south-west as far as the hill Gareb ; from which the line makes a turn, perhaps due south till Goah is reached. For Goah Cheyne suggests Gibeah 'hill,' identifyingit with Olivet. 40. The' regeneration of Jerusalem is to go so far that even the unclean districts' on the south, the valley of Hinnofn defiled with human sacrifice ('the dead bodies'), are to be taken into the city and yet not to compromise its sanctity. Rather they will be JEREMIAH, 31. 4o— 32. i. S in the dead bodies, and of the ashes, and all the fields unto the brook Kidron, unto the corner of the horse gate to ward the east, shall be holy unto the Lord ; it shall not be plucked up, nor thrown down any more for ever. [S] The word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord 82 redeemed from their uncleanness by the mighty holiness resident within it, so that the whole city will be holy to Yahweh. the ashes: properly 'fat,' i.e. the ashes which resulted from the burning of the fat of the victims. the fields unto the brook Kidron. The Hebrew presents us with two alternative readings, one of which is adopted in R.V., while the other gives us a word which, if it is not a mere blunder, is not found elsewhere, and the meaning of which is un certain ; perhaps, as Graf supposed, places where rubbish was deposited. Cheyne follows Klostermann in reading ' furnaces.' The valley of Kidron is on the east of Jerusalem. the horse gate : according to Neh. iii. 27, 28, was near the Temple on the south-east of Jerusalem. xxxii. The Redemption of a Piece of Family Property by Jeremiah, and its Significance. The incident here recorded is obviously historical, and its meaning lies on the surface. At a time when the outlook was very dark, and landed property seemed the most hopeless form of investment, Jeremiah exercised his right of redemption, and bought with all due legal formalities a field from his cousin Hanamel. By this action he expressed his conviction that, in spite of the impending destruc tion of the State and captivity of the people, the time would come when property would be bought, no longer as a venture of faith, but as one of the ordinary transactions of life in which security of tenure could be taken for granted. The reasons which prompted Hanamel's offer to his cousin are unknown, but probably the scarcity and the consequent high prices had reduced him to, the necessity of selling his land.' That he should have gone to Jere miah is remarkable, in view of the bitter persecution the prop"het had had to endure from his kinsmen at Anathoth. We gather further from the incident that Jeremiah was apparently possessed of a competence. While the incident itself is clearly historical, the chapter raises difficult critical problems. The historical introduction explaining Jeremiah's circumstances at the time is regarded by most recent critics as secondary. In the prayer of Jeremiah Stade rejected xi2 JEREMIAH 32. i. S in the tenth year of Zedekiah king of Judah, which was 17-33, and found considerable support in this view. Duhm carried through the criticism to the extent of rejecting the whole of 16-44, and his results have been accepted by Cornill and Kent. Schmidt had independently reached the same result. Giesebrecht , takes 1-5, 1,7-23, 28-42 as later insertions, while Gillies and Rothstein pass a similar judgement. The detailed discussion is best reserved for the notes ; here the editor may simply say that he regards 1-5, 17-23, 28-35 as later additions ; and 36-44 as Jeremianipiin basis, but. in its present form later, than the destruc tion of Jerusalem, and perhaps worked over by the editor! xxxii. 1-5. In the tenth year of Zedekiah Jeremiah received a revelation when he was imprisoned in the court of the guard. For the king had imprisoned him because he had said that Yah weh would give Jerusalem to the king of Babylon, and Zedekiah should be captured and taken to Babylon, and be there till Yahweh visited him, so that the war with the Chaldeans was doomed to failure. 6-15. Yahweh told me that Hanamel my cousin would come and ask me to buy his field in Anathoth, which I had the right to purchase. So when he came and asked me to do this, I knew that, it was Yahweh who had told me. I bought the field for seventeen shekels, with all the due legal formalities.and gave the deed of purchase to Baruch, charging him to. put them in an earthen vessel that they might belong preserved. For Yahweh proclaims that property shall once again be bought in the land. 16-27. When I had delivered the deed to Baruqh: I prayed thus : O Yahweh, Creator of the world, for whom nothing is too hard, merciful to thousands and repaying the children for the sins of their fathers, wise and mighty, observant of all men's ways that they may receive the due reward of their deeds, who didst win for Thyself a name in Egypt, and didst bring Israel thence , with great wonders to this plentiful land, wherein Thy people have utterly disobeyed Thee, the siege mounts are here for the capture of the city, and by sword, famine, and pestilence it will be delivered into the hand of the Chaldeans ; yet Thou hast said, Buy the field, although the city is given up to the Chaldeans. Then Yah~ weh answered, ' I am Yahweh, is anything too wonderful for me ? ' 28-35. , Therefore thus saith Yahweh : I will deliver this city to the Chaldeans, who shall capture and burn it, polluted as it is with idolatry. The people have done evil from their youth, the city has provoked Me from the day it was built, so that I will remove it out of My sight for the sins which have angered Me. They have turned from Me in disobedience to My urgent instruction, JEREMIAH 32. 2. S n3 the eighteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar. Now at thaj: 2 defiling My house with their idols, and offering their children ; to Molech, though I had never enjoined anything so horrible upon them. '' ¦ ' ,1 ' 36-44. Yet to this city, now captured by Babylon, I w;ijl bring back its people from thejir dispersion, and cause them to, dwell safely in it. They shall be My people, I will be their Goci. I will give them a heart to fear Me, will make an everlasting covenant with them, and plant them in the land. As I have brought evil on them, so I will bring all the good I have promised. Fields shall again be bought in all parts of the land with all the due for malities of the law. , , , , xxxii. 1-5, This introduction, narrating the circumstances in which the transactions here recorded took place, is apparently- editorial. The suggestion which it conveys to the reader is that Jeremiah's imprisonment was due to Zedekiah's resentment at, the prediction of his capture and exile to Babylon, whereas it was due rather to the hostility of the princes and those responsible for the conduct of the military defence. The king was as friendly to Jeremiah as he dared to be, and used his prerogative to protect him as far as possible. But the passage is quite trustworthy in its indication of the period at which the event happened. The prophet's arrest took place in the interval between the first and second part of the siege, when the Babylonian army had left Jerusalem on account of the relief expedition sent by Egypt. He used the opportunity to start for Anathoth to attend to his property there, but was arrested on the pretext that he was deserting to the Chaldeans. After many days spent in the prison, he was removed, on his own petition to the king, to the court of the, guard, and remained there till the city was taken (xxxvii. 11— 21, xxxviii. 28). It was while he was in this condition of honourable confinement, in which his friends were permitted to visit him, that Hanamel came to request him to buy his field. We do not know definitely whether the siege had been resumed, but since ' many days ' had elapsed between Jeremiah's arrest and his removal to the court of the guard, the probabilities are that the city had been again in vested. This view is also favoured by the statement in 2, ' at that time the king of Babylon's army besieged Jerusalem.' In that case Hanamel would already be in Jerusalem, and had not come in from Anathoth in order to sell his land. (The contrary view taken by Cornill in his commentary, p. 359, is withdrawn, in favour of the view here taken, on p. xxxvii.) 1. the tenth year of Zedekiah. The siege of Jerusalem began in the ninth year of his reign (see xxxix. 1). 2. Jeremiah the prophet. We have here the same designation II I 114 JEREMIAH 32. 3-6. S J time the king of Babylon's army besieged Jerusalem : and Jeremiah the prophet was shut up in the court of the guard, 3 which was in! the' king bf Judah's house. For Zedekiah king of Judah had shut him1 up, saying, Wherefore dost thou prophesyy and say* Thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will give this city into the hand of the king of Babylon, 4 and he shall take it ; and Zedekiah king of Judah shall not escape out of the, hand of the Chaldeans, but' shall surely be delivered, into the hand of the king of Babylon, and shall speak with him mouth to mouth, and his eyes 5 shall behold his eyes ; and he shall lead Zedekiah to Babylon, and there shall he be iuntil I visit him, saith, the Lord : though ye fight with the Chaldeans, ye shall not prosper ? 6 [J] And Jeremiah said, The word of the Lord came which is so characteristic a feature in the Hebrew text of the section xxvii-xxix. It is omitted in the LXX. the court of the guard. This was attached to the king's palace : cf. Neh. iii. 35. A portion of the court was apparently set apart for those whom for any reason it was expedient to keep under observation and restraint, but whom it was undesirable to herd with the inmates of the common prison. The term does not mean the court where the guard was stationed, but the court where prisoners were guarded (see Driver, p. 367). 3-5 are a parenthesis, explaining the grounds on which Zedekiah had imprisoned the prophet. 3. Por r so Driver. It is more generally translated ' Where.' 5. The latter part of this verse ('until . . . prosper') is absent from the LXX, and is presumably a later addition. The words until I visit him' suggest that a change was to take place in Zedekiah's fortunes, aPd therefore bears a favourable sense ; never- nff-5 V"5*,81"6 am>>iSu°us> and, as such, unlikely to have been 7.7^- i5* Jer,<:1?lan- We have no indication elsewhere that -ieaekiah s condition was ameliorated. The author of this addition may have been acquainted with some story of the kind, but it is more probable that he confused Zedekiah with Jehoiachin, to whom such a change of fortune actually came (Iii. 31-34) 6. The present text makes the impression that Jeremiah related the incident which follows to Zedekiah in response to his question JEREMIAH 32. 7, 8. J 115 unto me, saying, Behold, Hanamel the son of Shallum 7 thine uncle shall come unto thee, saying, .Buy thee my field that is in Anathoth : for the right of redemption is thine to buy it. So Hanamel mine uncle's son came to 8 me in the court of the guard according to the word of the Lord, and said unto me, Buy my field; I pray thee; that is in Anathoth, which is in the land of Benjamin : for the right of inheritance is thine, and the redemption is thine ; buy it for thyself. Then I knew that this was the word of (3-5)> which is obviously impossible. The LXX reads 'And the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, saying,' and this is accepted by several scholars. It would also be possible to surmount the diffi culty by omitting the words ' Jeremiah said.' 7. thine tuicle. Usually it is thought, probably correctly, that Shallum, not Hanamel, was Jeremiah's uncle, and this is supported by 9 and the Hebrew text of 8, which definitely speak of Hanamel as ' my uncle's son.' On the other hand, he is called ' my uncle ' in 12, but we should probably read 'my uncle's son,' with LXX, Syriac, and a few Hebrew MSS. the right of redemption. The word for ' redemption ' is connected with the word go'el. The gffel was the next-of-kin, on whom various duties were imposed by this relationship (see Lev. xxv. 25 ff.). The duties had corresponding rights ; the go'el could choose whether he would exercise them or not, but till he declined no other could undertake them. Thus Boaz could not undertake this office for Ruth until the next-of-kin had declined it (Ruth iii. 9-13, iv. 1-12). Jeremiah had the right of pre emption because he was actually the next-of-kin, as is indicated by the fact that he had 'the right of inheritance.' The regulations were made to secure that property was kept in the family. We must not press the term ' redemption ' to mean that Hanamel s field had been already sold, and that he desired Jeremiah to buy it back. As the following verse shows, Hanamel was still the owner, but apparently was in need of money, as would be very intelligible in the situation. It is to be observed that at his time individual priests possessed landed property, and were able to dis pose of it freely: contrast Lev. xxv. 34. 8 which is . . . Benjamin. These words should be omitted, with the LXX ; obviously Jeremiah did not need to be told where Anathoth was situated. The words are a gloss introduced from 1. 1. Then I knew . . . the I.OBD. This is a very striking and instructive statement. In 6 he says, ' The word of the Lord came I 2 n6 JEREMIAH 32. 9. J .9 the Lord. And I bought the field that was in Anathoth unto me.' • Yet in the present verse we see that he did not know it to be the word of Yahweh till Hanamel actually came. Prob ably the prophet had a strong impression beforehand that Hanamel would come on this errand. It is by no means impossible that his own projected, journey 'into the land of Benjamin, to receive his portion there, in the midst of the people ' (xxxvii. 12), may have been connected with some such wish on the part of Hanamel to dispose of his property. Whether this was so or not, he was probably aware of his cousin's financial position and presence in the city, sO that the' presentiment that he would come to him had its origin in the actual conditions. But such a presentiment the prophet would not have dignified with the name 'the word of Yahweh ; ' only when it was fulfilled did he know that God had inspired it. Its Divine meaning, however, was not in the visit it self or in the premonition he had .received, but in the conviction of Israel's happy restoration it gave him the opportunity of ex pressing in so vivid and impressive a manner. Just as he learnt a lesson while he watched the potter moulding the clay, so a simi larly, trivial and commonplace sale of land is seen to be charged with a deep significance. His act is a symbol and a prophecy, it is God's pledge that the old stable condition of things will be restored when there will be a settled state of society in which houses and land would be freely bought and sold. Thus, he recognized that behind his cousin's action, and all unknown to him, the Divine impulse had been at work ; and also in the preparation he had himself received for his cousin's request. 9. Recognizing God's hand in it all, Jeremiah without any demur buys the field and pays the price. The sum of seventeen shekels may appear small. We may reasonably assume, however, that Jeremiah paid the full price, not the ' prairie value,' which at such a time was all it might have been expected to fetch. Only by paying this could he have taught the lesson he was guided to convey, that property would regain its stability, and be bought for, what it was intrinsically worth in normal conditions. The thresh ing floor and oxen of Araunah were sold for fifty shekels (2 Sam. xxiv. 24), the potter's field for thirty (Matt, xxvii. 3-10). Taking the value of the silver shekel at as. gd., seventeen shekels would be equivalent to £2 6s. gd. of our money, but the purchasing power would of course be very much greater. Commentators often quote as a parallel the purchase by a Roman, at full price in public auction, of the ground on which Hannibal's army was en camped (Livy xxvi. 11). that was in Anathoth : should be omitted, as by LXX. The clause in the Hebrew text follows ' mine uncle's son,' the JEREMIAH 32. 10, n. j n7 of Hanamel mine uncle's son, and weighed him the money, even seventeen shekels of silver. And I subscribed the to deed, and sealed it, and called witnesses, and weighed him the money in the balances. So I took the deed of the n E.V. has transposed it to improve the sense. We should follow the LXX also in omitting ' the money, even.' lO. The description which follows has given rise to a good deal of discussion, which it is unnecessary to record here since the true explanation seems to have been furnished by the discovery of deeds in Babylonia and Assyria of the same type as that here des cribed. In his Babylonian and Assyrian Laws, Contracts, and Letters, Dr. Johns has given an account of the method commonly pursued in executing deeds : ' As to external form, most of those which may be called "deeds " consist of small pillow-shaped, or rectangular, cakes of clay. In many cases these were enclosed in an envelope, also of clay, powdered clay being inserted to prevent the envelope adhering. Both the inner and outer parts were generally baked hard ; but there are many examples where the clay was only dried in the sun. The envelope was inscribed with a duplicate of the text. Often the envelope is more liberally sealed than the inner tablet. This sealing, done with a cylinder-seal running on an axle, was repeated so often as to render its design difficult to make out, and to add greatly to the difficulty of reading the text' (pp. 10, n). See also Jeremias, The Old Testament in the Light of the Ancient East, vol. ii, p. 281 : ' The clay tablet was wrapped in another layer, and upon the outer cover of clay the contents were inscribed together with the names of the witnesses, and the seal was rolled upon it also.' We have here then the same mode apparently followed, the deed 'which was open ' was the outer case containing a copy of the deed itself which was sealed up within it. The Hebrew text may have been glossed, but legal language is proverbially redundant, and it gives a more faithful representation than the LXX, which has been preferred by several who were not aware of the facts mentioned above. The object of repeating on the envelope the terms of the deed was that the latter might be preserved from any interference, so that if at any time a dispute arose, if the writing on the envelope was in any degree obliterated or there was a suspicion that it had been tampered with, the case might be broken and the deed itself con sulted. Even to the present day, Dr. Johns tells us, ' When the envelope has been preserved unbroken, the interior is usually perfect, except where the envelope may have adhered to it ' (loc. cit., p. 11). 11. The LXX reads simply, 'And I took the deed of the pur- ri8 JEREMIAH 32. 12-14. J purchase, both that which was sealed, " according to the law 12 and custom, and that which was open : and I delivered the deed of the purchase unto Baruch the son of Neriah, the son of, Mahseiah, in the presence of Hanamel mine uncle's son, and in the presence of the witnesses that sub scribed the deed of the purchase, before all the Jews that 13 sat in the court of the guard. And I charged Baruch 14 before itherri, saying, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God a fOr, containing the terms and conditions chase which was sealed,' the> rest of the verse being omitted. Several modern scholars accept this text, and get rid of the double deed. It is true that in the next verse We read of ' the deed of the purchase,' as if there were only one. . But, in the light of what has been already, said, it will be seen to be quite- natural that the same deed might be spoken of in the singular or in the plural, according as it was contemplated as a whole or in its separate parts. There is no thought of two separable: documents, but of two combined together. At the same time it is not unlikely that the clause following ' that which was sealed' should be omitted. The margin is preferable to the text, though 'containing' is not expressed in the Hebrew ; but the suggestion that the deed itself, which was sealed up, contained anything which was not on the envelope contradicts the, legal custom already described, according to which the envelope was inscribed with an exact and complete copy of the deed itself.' The words may have originated out of a mistaken repetition of the preceding words, or they may be a gloss. If the latter, they are presumably technical terms. Literally they.mean ' the command and the statutes.' The former term is taken by Driver as the injunction ' bidding the seller cede possession of the property ; '¦ others'translate ' the offer,' explaining thisto mean the description of. the field. The latter term probably means the conditions of purchase. 12. Baruch : here for the first time mentioned in the book, which we so largely owe to his pious care. He had for long aQted, as the prophet's amanuensis. mine uncle's son. The Hebrew simply reads ' my uncle,' but the word for 'son of has been accidentally omitted ; it is read by the LXX, Syriac, and about ten Hebrew MSS. (see note on 7). in the presence . . . the guard. The care taken that all the legal formalities should be observed is to be noticed, as well as the full-sounding legal phraseology in which it is recorded. 14. The Hebrew is clumsy and redundant, but this may be due JEREMIAH 32. 15-17. JS 119 of Israel: Take these deeds', this deed of the purchase, both that which is sealed, and this deed which is open, and put them in an eartheii vessel ; that they may con- > tinue many days. For thus saith the Lord of hosts, the 15 God of Israel : Houses and fields and vineyards shall yet again be bought in this land. . Now after I had delivered the deed of the purchase 16 unto Baruch the son of Neriah, I prayed unto the Lord, saying, [S] Ah Lord God ! behold, thou hast made the 17 to the adoption of legal phraseology. Even the LXX recognizes here the open deed in addition to that which was sealed up, and thus attests the fact which it has previously obliterated. an earthen vessel. The Babylonian and Assyrian deeds were frequently 'stored in pots of unbaked " clay . The pots, as a rule, have crumbled away, but they kept out the earth around ' (Johns, loc. cit., p. 12). Here Baruch stores the deed ' for many days,' since it will be a long time before the sign receives its fulfil ment. In times of disturbance it was customary to bury things for safe custody ; the earthen vessel served this purpose very well. 16-25. This prayer of Jeremiahis in the rnain a later insertion, as Stade was the first to point out; and as many (including evert Findlay) have since reco'gnize'd. Stade regarded. 24, 25 as summarizing Jeremiah's actual prayer, 17-23 being added at a later time. These verses are largely a mosaic of phrases we meet with elsewhere in the book and in Deuteronomy, and they closely resemble the prayer in Neh. ix. 5-38. The long introduc tion 17-23 is out Of proportion to" the prayer itself in 24; 25. Moreover the confession of Yahweh's omnipotence in 17 is' strange in view of the question which is put to the prophet in 27 as an answer to his prayer: Accordingly we should probably treat 17-23 as late. But it by no means follows that we should accept Duhm's view that 24, 25 should be judged similarly. These verses are quite suitable to the situation, and Jeremiah may well have uttered them, in spite of the height his faith had just reached. 17 The invocation begins with the confession of Yahweh s might as displayed in creation (17), then passes to His mercy and retribution and names His great name (18), then affirms His all- seeing scrutiny of human conduct, that each may receive his deserts Ciq). Froin these universal relations of Yahweh, we pass to His special relation to Israel, beginning With the wonders wroueht in Egypt at the Exodus (20, 21) and the entrance ot Srael on the possession of Canaan (22), arid then cOnfessmg the 120 JEREMIAH 32. i8-ao. S heaven and . the earth by thy great power and by thy stretched out arm ; there is nothing too a hardlfor thee : 18 which shewest mercy unto thousands, and recompensest the iniquity, of the fathers into the bosom of their children after them : the great, the mighty God,: the LorD Of 19 hosts is his name : great in counsel, and mighty in work : -whose eyes are open upon all the ways of the sons of men; to give every one according to his^ ways, 1 and 20 according to the fruit of his doings: which didst set signs and wonders in the land of Egypt, even unto this day, b both in Israel and among other men ; and madest 1 Or, wonderful | b Or, and disobedience which has brought this calamity upon the people (23). . We have thus a beautiful and well-ordered description of Yahweh's attributes and work as the later theology described it thy stretched out arm: see note on xxvii. 5. In 21 it is used in its more usual connexion with a great act of Divine deliverance. , , hard. The word is used of what lies outside the usual course of nature or events ; often it bears the meaning 'wonderful,' but 'hard' is preferable here. The LXX gives an inferior: text ,' hidden from thee.' . , 18. unto thousands. The reference is clearly to the Decalogue (Exod,. xx. 6, Deut. v. 10), the text of which has become so familiar that the author quotes it in this abbreviated, allusive form in the confidence that the reader will supply the rest. The passage means that, God shows mercy to thousands who belong to those who love Him: Thus while the sins of the fathers, are visited upon the children to the third and fourth generation, the principle of solidarity works on a far vaster scale in the bestowment of reward for love of God and observance of His commandments. 1 into the bosom. The folds on the bosom of the Oriental robe served as a pocket ; it was large enough for infants (Num. xi. 12) or lambs (Isa. xl. 11) to be carried in it. For the phrase 'to re compense into the bosom ' cf. Isa. lxv. 6, Ps. lxxix. 12. 19. For the end of the verse see note on xvii, 10. 20. Cf. Deut. vi. 22, Neh. ix. 10. even unto this day. This is difficult, since obviously the signs and wonders' in Egypt ceased at the Exodus. Perhaps the simplest expedient is to read ' and unto this day.' The ex pression is in any case somewhat loose. Cornill thinks it means JEREMIAH 32. 31-25. SJ 121 thee a name, as at this day; and didst bring forth thy 21 people Israel out of the land of Egypt with signs, and with wonders, and with a strong hand, and with a stretched out arm, and with great terror ; and gavest them this 22 land, which thou didst swear to their fathers to give them, a land flowing with milk and honey ; and they 33 came in, and possessed it ; but they obeyed not thy voice, neither walked in thy law ; they have done nothing of all that thou commandedst them to do : therefore thou hast caused all this evil to come upon them : [J] behold 24 the mounts, they are come unto the city to take it ; and the city is given into the hand of the Chaldeans that fight against it, because of the sword, and of the famine, and of the pestilence : and what thou hast spoken is come to pass ; and, behold, thou seest it. And thou 25 hast said unto me, O Lord God, Buy thee the field for ' which are celebrated unto this day,' but suggests that 'in the land of Egypt ' may be a gloss. 2 1 . Cf. Deut. iv. 34, xxvi. 8. The ' terror ' is the dread struck into Egypt and the surrounding nations by the judgements of God on Egypt and the wonders He wrought for His people at the Exodus : cf. Exod. xv. 14-16 ; Deut. ii. 25 ; Joshua ii. 9-1 1, v. 1. 22. Cf. xi. 5. The theme of this verse and the following is to be found in a very expanded form in Neh. ix. 22-35. 23. Cf. xi. 8. 24. the mounts: cf. vi. 6, xxxiii. 4 ; 2 Sam, xx. 15 ; 2 Kings xix. 32 ; Isa. xxxvii. 33 ; Ezek. iv. 2, xvii. 17, xxvi. 8. These were earthen embankments from which the storming parties made their assaults. This verse (if Jeremiah's) favours the view that when the purchase of the field took place the siege had been resumed. is given: a perfect of certainty ; the meaning is not that the Babylonians had already captured the city, but that they would undoubtedly do so, aided as they were by the famine and plague which were decimating the defenders. 25. It would be too prosaic to object that God had not said this ; Jeremiah had understood Him to mean this by the request his cousin had made. The LXX after ' money ' has an addition. It reads : ' So I wrote the deed, and sealed it, and called witnesses.' This may be the original text. 122 JEREMIAH 32. id. J money, and call witnesses ;/ whereas the city is^ given into the hand 'of the Chaldeans. 26 ' Then came the word of the Lord unto Jeremiah, say- ,;, ; ¦ I .!.., , - 26-44. We have now 'the answer of Yahvveh to Jeremiah's prayer. That it iSj as a whole, a later composition lies almost on the, surface. It, is largely irrelevant to the situation. We have an announcement of Yahweh's intention to destroy Jerusalem on account of the sins of the people from its earliest days (28-35). But this had for long beenthe theme of Jeremiah's preaching, and had (he section occurred in one of his own addresses to the people it wOiila, so far as its general contents go, and its expression, have seemed quite suitable. . But that in answer to his question as to the purchase of the land Yahweh should be represented as com municating to Jeremiah what for many years the prophet had been saying, and express it in the same language as hehadibeen using, is not easily reconcilable, wi^h the authenticity „of these, verses. They are a late insertion put together, presumably by the editor, out of Jeremiariie phrases'.' '¦ These objections do hot lie! to the same extent against ,36744,,. They are relevant to, the, question which the prophet has laid before God, and are less conventional in style. At the same time there are features which are difficult to harmonize with the actual situation of Jeremiah. In g@, accord ing to the Hebrew text, the people ('ye say') and not Jeremiah merely,1 speak of the city as given into the hand of the king of Babylon, though1 this does not seem to have been their belief at the time. But the LXX ' thou sayest '¦ should probably be accepted^ and the verse is then free from objection, verse 43 seems to pre suppose that the exile had already taken place, and 37 looks for a return from a wide dispersion. It is difficult, accordingly, to regard the whole passage as dating from the tenth "year of Zede kiah^ But if , the prayer in 24, 25 was uttered by Jeremiah in the circumstances recorded, it is natural to conclude that the answer belongs to the same time. An answer to the question: he lays before Yahweh is given in 43, 44, and there is no substantial reason for dis puting the authenticity of the latter verse, thdugh, as we have seen,43 apparently reflects a later situation. But with this we should take 26, 27, which forni a necessary introduction. Even so 44 is rather abrupt. The present writer is therefore inclined to think that, while 28r3.S.is.wllolly editorial, the rest of the section is substantially Jeremianic, but- committed to writing in its present form after the destruction of Jerusalem and the deportation Of the' Captives had tsKe-ri place. Even the reference to the dispersion is not neces sarily impossible on Jeremiah's lips : cf. xxiii. 3, 7; 8> xxiv. 9. 26. unto Jeremiah : read, with the LXX, unto me. JEREMIAH 32. 27-31. JS 123 ing, Behold, I am the Lord, the God of all flesh : is 27 there any thing too hard for me ? t [SJ Therefore thus saith the Lord: Behold, I wilt 28 give this city into the hand of the Chaldeans, and into the hand of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, and he shall take it : and the Chaldeans, that fight against this 29 city, shall come and set this city on fire, and burn, it, with the houses, upon whose roofs they have offered incense unto Baal, and poured out drink Offerings unto other gods, to provoke me to anger. For the children 30 of Israel and the children of Judah have only done that which was evil in my sight from their youth i for the children of Israel have" only provoked me to anger with the work of their hands, saith the Lord. For this city 31 27. This verse has been anticipated, by 17 (see notes), but. it is quite suitable to the situation, and we should rather infer that 17 is secondary than pass this judgement on both alike. ' ' ! ' 28. The introductory formula, ' Therefore thus saith the Lord,' would be in place in an address by the prophet ; it is quite un suitable in an answer given by Yahweh Himself to the prophet. The opening sentence is an expansion of 3 : the LXX simply reproduces that verse. 29. Cf. xix. 13, xxi. 10. 30. The reference to the sin of Israel alongside of the sin of Judah, While not strictly relevant to the threat of judgement oh the latter, may pass, since the writer is looking back on the whole history of the people. But the verdict, while it does not abso lutely contradict ii. 2, inasmuch as the early days, in Canaan might be regarded as still belonging to the nation's youth, agrees better with Ezekiel's estimate tharl Jeremiah's : cf. Ezek. xx. 5- 26. The second half of the. verse is absent from the LXX, and the reference to ' the children of Israel ' favours the omission. If it is used in the same restricted sense as in the former part of the verse, the omission of Judah is unaccountable, since the writer is concerned especially with it. If, however, it includes the southern as well as the northern tribes, it is difficult to think that the writer would use the designation in such different senses in consecutive clauses. 31. The passage reads as if the author thought that the Israelites built Jerusalem. Itis hardly credible that he did so ; the expreS* 124 JEREMIAH 32. 32-36. SJ ¦ hath been to me a provocation of mine anger and of my fury from the day that they built it even unto this day ; 32. that I should remove it from before my face : because of all the evil of the children of Israel and of the children of Judah, which they have done to provoke me to anger, they, their kings, their princes, their priests, and their prophets, and the men of Judah, and the inhabitants of 33 Jerusalem. And they have turned unto me the back, and not the face : and though I taught them', rising up early and teaching them, yet they have not hearkened 34 to receive instruction. But they set their abominations in the house which is called by my name, to defile it. 35 And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my amind, that. they should do this abomination; to cause Judah to sin. 36 [ j] And now therefore thus saith the Lord, the God of * Heb. heart. sion is loose. Probably he is under the influence of Ezekiel's description of the heathen origin of Jerusalem (Ezek. xvi. 3-6). According to this prophet, it well maintained a character har monious with this origin after the Israelites gained possession of ,t. , It is interesting to see how the writer passes to and fro from city (28, 29, 31) to people (30, 32, 33), \ 32, 33. For32a cf. xi. 17 ; for 32", 33° cf. ii. 26, 27 ; for 33" cf. vii, ,13; 25, xxv. 3, 4. 34, 35. These verses are largely identical with vii. 3ob, 31 (see the notes). We have in that passage ' the high places ; of Topheth;' and ' to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire.' Further, it -concludes with ' neither came it into my mind.' On Molech see the note on vii. 31 (vol. i, p. 155). Our passage agrees with Xix. 5 in speaking of ' the high places of Baal ' (see vol. i, p. 237). 36. The opening words can hardly be in their original form, Since Yahweh would not speak of Himself in this way (see note on 28). 'Therefore' is also inappropriate in this connexion, but it JEREMIAH 32. 37-40. J 125 Israel, concerning-this city, whereof ye say, It is given into the hand of the king of Babylon by the sword, and by the famine, and by the pestilence : Behold, I will gather them 37 out of all the countries, whither I have driven them in mine anger, and in my fury, and in great wrath; and I will bring them again unto this place, and I will cause them to dwell safely: and they shall be my people, and 38 I will be their God : and I will give them one heart and 39 one way, that they may fear me for ever ; for the good of them, and of their children after them : and I will make 40 an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away a from them, to do them good; and I will put my * Heb. from after them. is unobjectionable when 28-35 have been removed. It is a little curious that this verse should begin to speak of the city, and that in 37 we should pass abruptly to the people in the dispersion. ye say : see the note on 26-44 (P- 122). The LXX ' thou sayest ' harmonizes with 24 ; the Hebrew seems to have been assimilated to xxxiii. 10. 37. Giesebrecht suggests that originally 42 stood before 37-41. For 37a cf. xxiii. 3, and for the last clause cf. xxiii. 6. 38. Cf. xxxi. 33. 39. The LXX reads ' another way and another heart ; the difference between ' one ' and ' another ' in Hebrew is infinite simal, and it is impossible to say with certainty which is the original. We may compare Ezek. xi. 19, 'And I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within you ; ' the parallel passage Ezek. xxxvi. 26, however, reads 'A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you.' It is on the whole probable that we should retain the Hebrew here. All hearts would be of one accord to adopt the same way of life, and that the way along which God called them to walk. For the rest of the verse cf. Deut. iv. 10, vi. 24. 40. and I will . . . with them: cf. Isa. Iv. 3 ; Ezek. xvi. 60, xxxvii 26 The term 'new covenant ' is not actually used, but the same thing is meant ; and the latter part of the verse expresses the same thought as xxxi. 33b >" another form. The fear of God is implanted by God Himself in the heart, that they may not go astray from Him. , 1 will not turn away from them. As the margin says, the 12$ JEREMIAH 32. 41-44. J fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me; 41 Yea, I will rejoice over them to do them good, and I will plant them in this land aassuredly with my whole heart and 42 with my whole soul. ' For thus saith the Lord : Like as I,, have brought all this great evil upon this people, so will I bring upon them all the good that I have promised 43 them. And fields shall be bought in this land, whereof ye say, It is desolate, without man or beast ; it is given into 44 the, hand of the Chaldeans. Men shall buy fields for : I ., , : * Hebu in truth. Hebrew means ' from after them.' Giesebrecht finds this surprising, since elsewhere the people is represented as following Yahweh, not Yahweh as following the people. Accordingly he suggests ' I will not cease from having compassion upon them.' Cornill justifies the present text by a reference to Deut. xxiii. 14 (Heb. 15), where we read ,' tliat he see no unclean thing in thee, and turn away from after thee.' , And, as he points, out further, Giesebrecht'?; emendai tion eliminates tbe antithetic parallelism with ' they shall not de part from me ' at the close of the verse. to do them good. If, these words belong to the true text, it would be better to omit the comma before them, and connect cfosely with the . preceding clause, the sense being that Yahweh will not cease from following them to do them good. But they are absent from the LXX and are best omitted, especially, as we have not only had a similar clause in 39, but have practically the same words in 41, from which the insertion in our verse has prob ably been made. , 41. The former part of the verse is perhaps modelled on Deut, xxviii., 63: cf. xxx. 9; Isa. lxii. 5> 'xv. 19; Zeph. iii. 17. I will plant them : cf. xxiv. 6, xxxi. 27, 28. with my whole heart and with my whole soul. The only case in which this expressjpn is used with reference to God. 42. This repeats in another form the thought of xxxi. 28. 43. This verse .seems to presuppose that the exile had been already accomplished, so that the land lies desolate. At the same time, according to the Hebrew text, the verse was written in Palestine ('this land"), so, that its Jeremianic origin is- very dubious ; it would be easier to accept it. if, wjth the LXX, we read 'the land.' For 'ye say' the LXX, as in 36, reads 'thou sayest,' but ,the grounds for accepting it here are less cogent than in 36. 44. For the districts enumerated in this verse see note on xvii. 26, where the^e is asimilar enumeration buf in a somewhat different JEREMIAH 32. 44— 33: 1. JE la7. money, and subscribe the deeds, and seal, them, and- call witnesses, in the land of Benjamin, and in the places about Jerusalem, and in the cities of Judah, and in the cities of the hill country, and in the cities of the lowland, and in the cities of the South: for I will cause their captivity to return, saith the Lord. [K] Moreover the word of the Lord came unto Jere- 33 order. Here 'the land of Benjamin' stands first, since' the field Jeremiah had bought was situated in it. The fullness of detail is noticeable also in the mention of the legal formalities accompany ing a sale. xxxiii. Renewed Promises of Restoration and Blessedness. This section is closely connected with xxxii, and, like it, raises serious critical problems. The chapter falls into two main divis ions : (a) 1-13, (b) 14-26. The latter is omitted in the LXX, and its Jeremianic authorship is surrendered by most recent scholars. The evidence of the LXX is here very weighty. We can see no sound reason why the translator should have omitted the passage if it had been in his Hebrew text ; it is therefore likely that it is a very late addition. The omission has been explained as due to its numerous repetitions of passages found elsewhere, and the non- fulfilment of the prophecies with reference to David and his family and the Levites. But the translator does not make a practice of striking out repetitions (see vol. i, p. 68), and if he had omitted promises which in his time had not been fulfilled, his handling of the book would have been drastic indeed. The fact that promises had not been fulfilled did not mean that their fulfilment would never come. The Jews of the post-exilic period turned with peculiar interest to the glowing prophecies of future happiness which stood in such inviting contrast to their unhappy state ; their temptation was not to eliminate but to add such passages. The repetitions which the passage contains are not favourable to its authenticity, nor yet the prominence given to. the Levitical priests, which has no parallel in Jeremiah's own writing. The former part of the chapter (1-13) has been very generally accepted as Jeremiah's, apart from 2, 3. Duhm regards 1-13 as late, and is followed by Cornill, so that these scholars recognize nothing as Jeremiah's in xxxii, xxxiii beyond xxxii. 6-15. Schmidt independently assumes much the same position. This position we have not been able to adopt with reference to xxxii, and the case with xxxiii. 1-13 is similar. We should probably recognize a Jeremianic basis which has been worked over by the editor. 128 JEREMIAH 33. 2. RS miabthe second time, while he was yet shut up in the court 2 of the guard, saying, [s] Thus saith the Lord that doeth Even in its present form, however, it is earlier than 14-26, which from its absence in the LXX we must infer to be one of the latest elements in the book. . l . , xxxiii. 1. This is the second revelation which came to Jeremiah jn the court of the guard. 2,3. Yahweh, the accomplisher of His purpose, says : Call and I will answer, and disclose unknown secrets. 4-9. The houses are being broken down to form defences against the assaults of the Chaldeans, but the slain of Yahweh will be many., Yet, Yahweh will heal His people, restore Israel and Judah, cleanse them from all their guilt, and make Jerusalem so glorious that the nations will fear. 10-13. Once more the land now desolate shall ring with rejoicing, and life will be resumed in all its fullness as of yore. All over the country there shall be the homesteads Of shepherds, guarding their flocks. 14-18. In the days to come Yahweh will raise up a righteous shoot to David, who shall reign as a righteous King over Judah and Israel, and his name shall be ' Yahweh is pur righteousness.' • For David shall never fail of a successor on the throne of Israel, nor the Levitical priests of one to offer sacrifice. 19-22. If Yahweh's covenant with day and night should be broken, then it may be broken with David and with the Levitical priests. As the stars cannot be numbered nor the sand measured, so shall the seed of David and'the Levites be multiplied. 23-26. In answer to the complaint that Yahweh has cast off His people, He affirms that only when day and night cease, or the ordinances of heaven and earth, will He cast away the seed of Jacob, or the house of David. xxxiii. 1. See note on xxxii. ^. 2, 3. On account of their Deutero-Isaianio phraseology, Movers and Hitzig assigned these verses to the Second Isaiah. Graf rejected this, as he rejected the similar treatment of xxx, xxxi, but he admits that ' they make the impression that they are an insertion bya later hand.' This judgement has, been accepted by a large number of scholars. Their elimination of it was of course bound up with the probably correct view that 1-13 was as a whole the work of Jeremiah. Naturally if the whole section is late, as Duhm thinks, there is no necessity, to regard 2, 3 as an insertion. The reference to what follows as things previously unknown does not suit the contents of 4-13, since they do not contain anything beyond what may be found in xxxi, xxxii. that doeth it. If the text is right, there may be an allusion JEREMIAH 33. 3, 4- SJ 129 it, the Lord that formeth it to establish it ; the Lord is his- name : Call unto me, and I will answer thee, and will 3 shew thee great things, and "difficult, which thou knowest not. [J] For thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, con- 4 a Heb. fenced in. to Isa. xxii. 11 (this passage seems to have been in the author's mind : cf. 4, 5 with Isa. xxii. 10), where we have (in the Hebrew) the same indefinite mode of reference, 'that had done it,' 'that fashioned it,' i. e. His purpose. But the text here is otherwise not free from objection ; and the LXX reading, ' who made the earth and formed it to establish it,' is to be preferred : cf. Isa. xiv. 18. The word 'to form* is frequently used in II Isaiah in parallelism with ' make ; ' for ' Yahweh is his name ' cf. ' Yahweh of hosts is his name,' Isa. xlvii. 4, xlviii. 2, li. 15, liv. 5, but also Jer. xxxi. 35, xxxii. 18, and the creation passages in the Book of Amos (iv. 13, v. 8, ix. 6) which many scholars consider to be late. In Jer. x. 1-16, a passage which also has marked affinities with II Isaiah," we find the same turn of phrase in a context which emphasizes the thought of Yahweh as the Creator, ' for he is the former of all things ; and Israel is the tribe of his inheritance: the Lord of hosts is his name ' (x. 16). The third verse is closely parallel to Isa. xlviii. 6b : ' I have shewed thee new things from this time, even hidden things, which thou hast not known.' It is not unlikely that, as several scholars following Ewald believe, We should, with some Hebrew MSS., read ' hidden ' for ' difficult ' here, the two words differing only by a single consonant (i. e. n'tsuroth for bHsuroih). The word rendered ' difficult ' means ' inaccessible,' but it is used elsewhere of cities. 4, 5. The historical situation here reflected is the time of the siege as Indicated in 1, so that the verses may well be Jeremiah's. But the passage is very difficult in its 'present form, and unques tionably corrupt. Graf/in spite of his loyalty to the Hebrew text, closes his long enumeration and discussion of the various sugges tions made with the words 'One must renounce a restoration and satisfactory explanation of the plainly corrupt passage' (p. 418). The reference to the houses is itself strange, since we do not hear that they were destroyed because on their roofs idolatrous sacrifice had been offered (xix. 13, xxxii. 29), which would have formed a good contrast with the restoration of the city, but simply of their destruction to furnish materials for the defence (cf. Isa. xxii 10) for which the kings' houses would not have been expected to be employed. But, apart from this, the- present text is impossible, as indeed is clear from the R.V. 'They come K 13P JEREMIAH 33. 4. J cerning the nouses of this city, and concerning the houses obviously cannot refer to the houses, yet that is the grammatical sense. Even if we strain the words' to mean the inhabitants, we not only do unjustifiable violence to the language, but we do not gain a good sense. The writer should have said ' They go out,' and there is no point in the mention of the houses. If this sense had been intended, it should have been expressed in a much simpler way, such as, ' the houses of this city . . . against the swords. And their.inhabitants go out to fight,' &c. The easiest expedient is to omit the particle rendered 'with,' and translate, 'The Chaldeans are coming tp fight.' This gets rid of the difficulty caused by, the, apparent reference in ' They come ' to the houses, and ' come ' is the appropriate verb for the attack of the besieging .party. It is still surprising in view of the fact that, the introduc tion suggests an oracle spepially devoted to ' the houses,' that there is no reference to them; specifically in the sequel, though the bringing of hew flesh on the city (6) is a figurative way of saying that her breaches are made good. Such breaches, hdwever,rare in the main those caused by the enemy when the city had been captured, not those made by the defenders. The other attempts to .restore the passage to its original form do not seem any more satisfactory. Duhm omits all after ' broken down ' to 'Chaldeans,' and points the next word differently and gets the sense ' which are broken down and filled with the dead bodies,' &c. He supposes that the author of this insertion took objection to thestatement that the houses were broken down while the city was still uncaptured and added these words as an explanation. The insertion itself is emended by him ' for the mounts and bulwarks, when they began to fight with the Chaldeans.' This very clever restoration is open to criticism in detail, but it is too violent to inspire confi dence, and the mounds are not represented elsewhere as used for defence but only for attack. Cornill suggested a radical reconstruction in the Sacred Books of the Old Testament, and has virtually repeated it in his commentary : ' which are broken down, against which the Chaldeans come with mounds and swords to fight and to fill with the dead bodies,' &c. This gives a fairly satisfactory sense, but it is secured at the cost of rearranging and to some extent rewriting the passage. But, like Duhm's sugges tion, it does not remove the difficulty previously mentioned, that the houses receive a prominence when the subject-matter of the oracle is announced which is not justified by the sequel, The present writer is, accordingly driven to the view that the difficulty has been created not by insertion but by accidental omission ; he suspects that several words have fallen out after ' broken down ' or possibly after ' sword,' and that the attempt to restore sense to the passage thus mutilated has possibly led to, further corruption JEREMIAH 33. 5-9. J I31 of the kings of Judah, which are broken down to make a defence against the mounts, and against the sword : They 5 come to fight with the Chaldeans, but it is to fill them with the dead bodies of men, whom I have slain in mine anger and in my fury, and for all whose wickedness I have hid my face from this city. Behold, I will bring it a health and 6 cure, and I will cure them ; and I will reveal unto them abundance of peace and truth. And I will cause the cap- 7 tivity of Judah and the captivity of Israel to return, and will build them, as at the first. And I will cleanse them 8 from all their iniquity, whereby they have sinned against me ; and I will pardon all their iniquities, whereby they have sinned against me, and whereby they have trans gressed against me. And this city shall be to me for 9 n Or, healing Presumably the oracle dates from a time when the siege had been renewed and houses were pulled down to strengthen the defence ; and affirmed that though this had happened, and the Chaldeans were coming to heap high the dead bodies of the victims of Yahweh's wrath, yet He would bring back fresh flesh to heal the wound of Zion. 6. health: rather fresh flesh: see note on viii. 22, cure them : several read ' cure her,' which may be attested by the LXX, though the clause is in a different place and may be an insertion in its text. abundance. If the text is correct we must suppose that the word, which does not occur elsewhere in this sense, is an Aramaism. But the versions do not confirm the reading, and the text is probably corrupt. Rothstein suggests ' abodes' {lah m"5noth for lahem 'dihereth), but Duhm's suggestion 'treasures' {'athidoth as in Isa. x. 13) is nearer the Hebrew and suits ' reveal ' admirably, since 'treasure ' is usually something which is hidden. peace and truth : i.e. peace and stability; but perhaps we should read, as in xiv. 13, ' peace of truth,' i. e. assured peace. 7. as at the first : i. e. before the disruption of the kingdom ; the reigns of David and Solomon are probably in the writer's mind : cf. Isa. i. 26. 8. Cf. xxxi. 34, Isa. iv. 4, but especially Ezek. xxxvi. 25. 9. Cf. xiii. 11. The emotion aroused in the nations by the ex altation of Zion is apparently one of dread, just as the wonders of K 2 132 JEREMIAH 33. 10-12. J S a name of joy, fora praise and for a glory, before all the nations of the earth, which shall hear all the good that Ido unto them, and shall fear and tremble for all the good and 10 for all the peace that I procure unto it. [s]Thus saith the Lord : Yet again there shall be heard- in this place, whereof ye say, It is waste, without man arid without beast, even in the cities of JudaJh,iand in tbe streets of Jerusalem, that are desolate, without man and without inhabitant and n without beast, the voice of joy and the, voice of gladness^ the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, ithe voice of them that say, Give thanks to the Lord of hosts, for the Lord is good, for his mercy endureth for ever: and of them that bring sacrifices of thanksgiving into the house of the Lord. For I will cause the captivity of the 12 land to return as at the first, saith the Lord. Thus saith the Lord of hosts : Yet again shall there be in this place, the Exodus period struck terror into Egypt and the peoples of Canaan : see, on xxxii. 20, 21. It is possible that pleasure rather than dread is intended (cf. Isa. Ix. 5), but improbable. 10, 11 presuppose that the Fall of Jerusalem has taken place, and that the land has been laid waste. The opening clauses of ii" contain the reversal of what we read in vii. 34, xvi. 9, xxv. 10. The liturgical formula, ' Give thanks . . ., for ever,* is frequent in the later Psalms. This in itself would not necessarily stamp our passage as late ; it is, indeed, quite possible that the formula may have been: ancient, but if so we should have expected to find it in the earlier psalms. The reference tp the thanksgiving offer ing is almost identical with a similar reference in xvii, s6, which is a latepassage (see pp. 225, 226). , And the repetition of 7 in the last clause, though in a briefer form, is strange. 12, 13. The same situation as in 10, 11. The verses remind us of xxxi. 2-6,1 and are partly identical with xvii. 26, xxxii. 43, 44 (see the notes). The writer, as he looks on the wasted country, sees it in imagination once more dotted, with the shepherds' homesteads, and the flocks reclining at noon (Song, of Songs, i. 7) or passing along as their keepers count them to see that none is missing. The idyllic picture would have been congenial to, Jere miah's tastes and ideals ; it is questionable, however, whether we really owe it to him. JEREMIAH 33. 13-18. S 133 which is waste, without man and without beast, and in all the cities thereof; an habitation of shepherds causing their flocks to lie down. In the cities of the hill country, in the 1 3 cities, of the lowland, and in the cities of the South, and in the land of Benjamin, and in the places about Jerusalem, and in the cities of Judah, shall the flocks again pass under the hands of him that telleth them, saith the Lord. . Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will per- 14 form that good word which. I have spoken concerning the house of Israel and concerning the house of Judah; In 15 those days,; and at that time, Will I cause a f Branch . of rights eousness to grow up unto David ; and he shall, execute judgement and righteousness in the land. In those days 16 shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely : and this is the name whereby she .^hall tje called,, The Lord is our righteousness. For thus saith the Lord: 17 b David shall never Want a man to sit upon the throne of tbe house of Israel; neither shall the priests the Levites is want a man before me to offer burnt offerings, and to " See ch. xxiii,'5- "b Heb. There shallnofbe cut .off from David. 14-16. This, passage is. largely repeated from xxiii. 5, 6, on which see vol. i, pp. 260-2, with a touch , introduced from xxix. 10. Very remarkable, however, is it that the nam*,' Yahweh is our righteousness,' which Jeremiah assjgned'to the MesSjah, ishere transferred to the city. ;,.,,, v- , , ,„,, _ u<; -;¦_ 17 1 The prediction "of the permanence of the Davidic dynasty has reference to the ;future ; at the time when thj: passage was written the, monarchy had fallen. ¦ ;, ,,,. ,-,-.-»,.; , ' ip. the priests the levites : i. e. the Levitical priests. , I his is the phrase used by Deuteronomy and in other literature earlier than the Reformation under Nehemiah, It is probable, }hat this passage was written after the": distinction between priests and Levites had been established by the. acceptance of the Pnestjy Legislation. If" so, the" writer .avails himself of the archaic mode of expression, which indicated that all the memhers of the tribe of Levi were entitled to act as priests. This verse is written from a standpoint very different from Jeremiah's. to offer . . ¦ continually. The burnt-offering was wholly 134 JEREMIAH 33. 19-24. ¦ S 19 burn a oblations, and to do sacrifice continually;: And ao the word of the Lord came unto Jeremiah, saying, Thus saith the Lord : If ye can break! toy> covenant of the day, and my covenant of the nighti, so that there should- not be 21 day and night in their season ; then may also inly covenant be broken with David my servant, that he should not have a son to reign upon his throne ; and with the Levites the 22 priests, my ministers. As the host of heaven cannot' be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured j so will I multiply the-' seed of David my servant* and the^ Levites 23 that minister unto me. And the word of the Lord came 24 to Jeremiah, saying, Considerest thou not what this people 1 fOr, meal offerings made over to God ; the oblation was the vegetable bffering ; the sacrifice was used for a feast, of which the offerer and his friends partook,' though a portion of course was given to Gpd : see note on vii. 21 (vol. i, p. 151). 20-26. The passage is closely parallel to xxxi. 35, 36, and probably an imitation of it. The Hebrew for ' my covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night ' is suspicious ; if it is correct, as in view of the late origin of the passage it may be, the mean ing is apparently the covenant which Yahweh has made with day and night. Possibly we should read 'the covenant' for 'my covenant,' Which would restore a regular construction ; Duhm thinks the point is that day and night make a covenant with each other, to observe their own season, but this is questionable. 21. For this covenant with David see 2 Sam. vii. 16, r Kings ii. 4- , 32. Cf. Gen. xv. 5, and for a closer parallel xxii. 17. The com parison is expressed in loose terms-, but the meaning is clear. It is remarkable that's prophecy originally spoken of the whole people should here be applied to the rdyal and priestly families. 24. This verse is difficult. The ' two families ' are probably not the house of David and the house of Levi, though the preced> ing verses have, spoken of these, but in accordance with 26 (as in Ezek. xxxv. 10), Israel and Judah. ' This people ' according to usage should refer to Israel (i'.ei the whole people including both 'families'), but if we read 'before them' at the end of the verse, it would follow that a heathen people is intended. It is therefore probable that, with some versions, we should read ' before me.' A JEREMIAH 33. 25— 34. i. SB 135 have spoken, saying, The two families which the Lord did choose, he hath cast them off? thus do they despise my people, that they should be no more a nation before them. Thus saith the Lord : If my covenant of day and night 25 stand riot, if I have not appointed the ordinances of heaven and earth ; then will I also cast away the seed of Jacob, 26 and of David my servant, so that I will not take of his seed to be rulers over the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob : for I will "cause their captivity to return, and will have mercy on them. [B] The word which came unto Jeremiah from the 34 a Or, return to their captivity still better sense is given by Duhm's emendation, ' he hath cast them off, and despiseth his people, that it should be no more a nation before him.' 25. Cf. 20. A verb would be expected in the first clause to correspond to 'have appointed.' Duhm has made the very attractive suggestion that we should make a very slight alteration in the word rendered 'my covenant' (bdra'thi for Wrtthi), reading 'If I have not created day and night,' ,- Cornill and Rothstein accept it. If it is original it was naturally assimilated to 20 by some scribe. 26. Duhm and Cornill strike out ' of Jacob, and ; ' the omission is favoured by the sequel which speaks of ' his seed ; ' but is not necessary. xxxiv. 1-7. Jeremiah Warns Zedekiah or the Disaster which awaits Continued Resistance to Babylon. We now resume the biographical portion of the work, which was of course partially resumed in xxxii. The incident recorded in this section took place probably before the interruption of the siege by the relief army from Egypt, in which the second incident recorded in this chapter falls (21, 22), We may infer from 2 that Jeremiah had not yet lost his liberty. The narratives quite trust worthy, though possibly mutilated to some extent (see note on 4). xxxiv. 1-3. When Nebuchadnezzar and his hosts were fighting aeainst Jerusalem and its cities, Jeremiah was sent to warn Zede kiah that Jerusalem would be taken and burnt by the king of Babylon, and he himself would be confronted with the victor and taken to Babylon. i36 ; JEREMIAH 34.; 2, 3.. B Lord, when Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, and all his army, tod all the kingdoms of the earth that were under his dominion, and all the peoples, fought against Jerusalem, and against, all, the cities thereof, saying : 2 Thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, Go, and speak , to Zedekiah king, of Judah, and tell him, Thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will give this city into the; hand iof Ithe 3 king of Babylon, and he shall burn it with fire : and thou , — , - , , , 1 , . ¦ , - 4-7. Yet he should not die by the sword, but in. peace, with the customary royal burnings and lamentations. So Jeremiah declared this message to Zedekiah, when Babylon was warring against Jerusalem-, Lachish,; and Azekah, the only cities that remained un- captured. xxxiv. 1. Since in 7 we have a fairly precise indication of the time, it is likely that this verse is largely editorial ; had Baruch written it he would have inserted here the information he gives in 7. This conclusion is confirmed by the somewhat bombastic' style, though the LXX'gives us an abbreviated form. 2. Duhm thinks thefirst part of the verse is editorial, and that Baruch would simply have said ' Then Jeremiah said to Zedekiah, Thus saith,' &C. His reason is that Jeremiah wOuld notbe one of those who had access to the royal presence at any time.1 It is hardly -likely, ' however, that a prophet of Jeremiah's standing would have found any difficulty in approaching the king, if he went to deliver the word of Yahweh to him. For the latter part of the verse cf. xxi. 10, xxxvii. 8-ib, xxxviii.' 23. 3. Cf. xxxii. 4, 5. Duhm infers from Baruch's silence as to the blinding of Zedekiah and the execution of his sons that they are unhistoricali He thinks that the king succeeded in establishing his personal innocence at his interview with Nebuchadnezzar, and since Jehoiachin was' not used very badly, Zedekiah may have escaped anything worse than imprisonment for life. But we should rather argue, If Jehoiachin, who was personally innocent of his father's rebellion, was taken into captivity and languished in prison through the Whole of Nebuchadnezzar's long reign, how should we expect Zedekiah to be treated by a 'suzerain to whom he owed his throne, when he violated his solemn oath of allegiance* the breach of which he had previously meditated ? We may make allow ances for the king's difficult position, but we cannot acquit him of serious blame. Ezekiel condemned his action in the strongest terms (Ezek. xvii. 1-21). And his testimony to the blinding of Zedekiah should settle the question : ' and I will bring him to JEREMIAH . 34. 4-6. B 137 shalt not escape out of his hand, but shalt surely be taken, and delivered into his hand ; and thine eyes shall behold the eyes of the king of Babylon, and he shall speak with thee mouth to mouth, and thou shalt go to Babylon. . Yet hear the word of the Lord, O Zedekiah 4 king of Judah: thus saith the Lord concerning- thee, Thou shalt not die by the sword ; thou shalt die in 5 peace ; and with the burnings of thy fathers, the former kings which were before thee, so shall they a make a burn ing for thee ; and they shall lament thee, saying, Ah lord! for I have spoken the word, saith the Lord. Then 6 1 See 2 Chron. xvi. i4,xxi. 19. Babylon to the land of the Chaldeans; yet shall he not see it, though he shall die there ' (xii. 13). 4, 5. These verses raise a serious problem. The most obvious interpretation is that although Zedekiah will have to go to Babylon, he will not be executed but die in peace, arid all the wonted honours paid to Jewish kings at their death will be paid to him. But as Hitzig, with the full approval of Graf and some of the best among recent expositors, forcibly argued, such a mitigation by Jeremiah of the consequences of rebellion would be in direct opposition to his invariable attitude and the impression he desired to make. It was also hardly in. harmony with the event, for the almost idyllic description of peaceful death and, honourable burial would riot have prepared the king for the bereavement he suffered and the blinding he had personally to endure. But sirrce Jeremiah could not have said Jo the king, 'You will have to go into captiv ity, but; matters will not be so bad after all,' we must regajd this as a conditional promise. If the Icing surrenders unconditionally he shall retain his throne till his death, and then be honoured as his predecessors had been. Of course the text in its present form does not say this, but we should rather attribute this to the loss of a few words, than to the unskilful style of the narrator. The beginning of 4 suggests in fact that a contrast to the course the king was pursuing should follow. with the burnings ... for thee. The reference is to the burn ing of sweet spices at the funeral of a king, not to the cremation of the corpse, for this was buried, not burned (see 2 Chron xvi, 14, xxi. 19). It would be better to read, with LXX, Syr., Vulg., 'as at the burnings.' .. Ah lord I See note on xxii. 18. 138 JEREMIAH 34. 7, 8. B Jeremiah the. prophet spake all these words unto Zedekiah 7 king of Judah' iri Jerusalem, when the king OfBabyloh's army fought against Jerusalem, and against all the1 cities of Judah that were left, against Lachish and against Azekah ; for these alone remained of the cities of Judah as fenced cities. 8 '» The word that came unto Jeremiah from the Lord, 7. The LXX omits 'all' and 'that were left;' it would give a better sentence if we omitted the Whole clause, reading simply 'against Jerusalem, against Lachish,' &c. Presumably a scribe added' after 'Jerusalem' the familiar ' all the cities of Judah ;'. then a later scribe, observing' how incongruous this was, since only two were involved, corrected the text into its present form. Lachish is to be identified with Tell el-Hesy, which is about thirty-five miles south- west of Jerusalem. It was a strongly fortified place, .which was' occupied by Sennacherib as his base during his campaign in 701 B.C. Azekah- has not yet been identified; according to Joshua xv. 35, 1 Sam. xvii. 1, it was in the Shephelah, not far from Socoh : it. seems to have been a fortress in the south-west of Judah, about fifteen miles from Jerusalem. xxxiv. 8-22. Condemnation of the Re-enslavement of Hebrew Slaves in Violation of Oath. The general situation is fairly clear, but the passage presents some difficulties. During the earlier part of Nebuchadnezzar's siege of Jerusalem, Zedekiah induced his people to liberate their Hebrew slaves. When, hclwever, the siege was raised on account of the relief expedition from Egypt, they forced back into bondage the slaves whom they set free. Their cynical perfidy was aggra vated by a blasphemous perjury. For the edict of emancipation was not merely a civil proclamation; it was ah oath sworn with all the solemnities of religion, and thus placed under the protection of Yahweh. The human wrong would in any case have excited the prophet's burning indignation ; but their shameless violation of the sanctities of religion, this flouting of their God to His face, involved them in a still deeper coridemnariori. The narrative, however, as it stands is very incomplete. No-indicatiOn is given as to the motive of their conduct, Duhm supposes that the eman cipation rested simply On political grounds, and had nothing to do With the Law or religibn. During the siege the slaves were of tio use to the inhabitants, since they would normally be engaged in the fields outside the' walls, and now that the city was invested they were a burden on the food-supply. By their action they had fewer useless mouths to feed, and perhaps enlisted some more free JEREMIAH 34. 8. B I39 after that the king Zedekiah had made a covenant with men for the defence of the city. When the siege was raised the work m the fields could be resumed, so that the slaves again became of service. The impression made by the narrative, how ever, is not that emancipation was purely prudential and selfish, but that in itself it was a boon to the slaves, which on Duhm's interpretation it could hardly have been. It is much more probable that it was intended as such, not of course out of disinterested motives, but because by such a costly surrender the masters hoped to win the help of Yahweh against Babylon. When the siege was raised, they thought, with characteristic optimism, that the danger was over, and there was no need to leave their former slaves in enjoyment of their liberty now that the granting of it had secured what they wanted. The denunciation of their conduct in 13 ff. creates a difficulty, in that it connects the release of the slaves with the law that Hebrew slaves were to bereleased in the seventh year (Exod. xxi. 2, Deut. xv. 12). But this law seems to be irrelevant to the action here recorded. For the law provided for release at the end of six years dating from the beginning of the individual's servitude, so that there was no fixed point of time when all the slaves would be released, but the occasion for release might fall at any time. But the act of which we read in this chapter was a simultaneous emancipation of all the Hebrew slaves, quite irrespective of the term of service. Now it is quite probable that the law had for a considerable time been disregarded, and that many had been in servitude for longer than six years. But it is also probable that the term fixed by the law had in many cases not expired. It is therefore a plausible inference that the reference to the law is due to an editor. It is possible, however, that the emancipation was undertaken in obedience to the neglected law ; and that to make their action even more effective, and perhaps atone for their earlier disregard, they decided to emancipate all their slaves with out waiting till the legal term had expired. A death-bed repentance, with the usual sequel on recovery ! xxxiv. 8-1 1. Zedekiah made a covenant with the people of Jeru salem to release their Hebrew slaves. The princes and people agreed and released them, but afterwards re-enslaved them. 13-16. Jeremiah reminds them that their fathers had disobeyed the law bidding them release their Hebrew slaves in the seventh year; they had themselves, however, made a covenant in the Temple before Yahweh to let the slaves go free, and then brought them back into bondage. 17-22. Since then they have disobeyed His command to set their brethren free, Yahweh will set them free to fall a prey to sword, plague, and famine, and make them a consternation to all I4Q JEREMIAH .34. 9, 10. B all the people which were at ' Jerusalem, to proclaim; 9 liberty unto them ; that every mari should let his man servant, and every i man his maidservant, being an, Hebrew or an Hebrewess, go free'; that none should serve 'him- I0 self of them, to wit, of "a Jew his brother;: and all tbe nations. And those, who made the covenant, by cutting the, calf in twain and passing between the pieces, shall be given up to their enemies; and their ;carcasses shall be food for bird and beast.- And Zedekiah and his princes will be .given to the,., Babylonian army. For though ithas left Jerusalem Yahweh will bring it back, and it will capture and burn the city. , ,, it xxxiv. 8. The verse gives the date of the oracle inexactly^ for it was after the breach of faith had been committed that Jeremiah's denunciation was uttered, ... • ~ ,- . ., , to proclaim liberty unto them. ' Unto them ' should- prob ably be omitted, as by LXX. The reference should be to, -the people, butapparently the sense is, not that the. proclamation, of release should be communicated to the people, but that freedom should be announced to the slaves. , The word rendered ' liberty ' is unusual, and is not found in the earliest legislation or in Deuter* onomy, though in Lev. xxv. io.it' is employed with reference. to the year of Jubilee:' see also Ezek. xlvi. 17, Isa. lxi; 1. 9. The number of Hebrew slaves is explained, by the conditions of the time. The old peasant. proprietors had been largely exter minated in the wars,; the ^heavyatKbute and, taxation had ruined the poorer people ; wealth had: accumulated in comparatively few handstand had' been employed in luxury;and other, barren ex!*" penditure? so that the poor, seeing no alternative but starvation, had; been forced to sell their childrenand then themselves into slavery.-, In the!, earlier, -period the relation between |nasters and slaves seems to have been friendly -and humane; but in the capi talist era which had supervened, class distinctions, would be aggravated and \he old. personalities, would to a large, extent have given place to the point of view we associate with slavery. that none . . . his brother. The clause is very clumsy in lie Hebrew.! The LXX gives, ' so that no one , of Judah should any more be a slave.' ,, , 10, II. Here also, the LXX has a briefer ' text : 'And. all the princes and all the people, which had entered into the, covenant that every one should let his manservant and every one his maidservant go free, turned and brought them into subjection for manservants and maidservants.' It is they will present their supplication before the Lord, and will return every one from his evil way : for great is the anger and the fury that the Lord hath pronounced against this 8 people. And Baruch the son of Neriah did according to all that Jeremiah the prophet commanded him, reading in the book the words of the Lord in the Lord's house. 9 Now it came to pass in the fifth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah, in the ninth month, that all the people in Jerusalem, and all the people that came from a fOr, a fast day b Heb. their supplication will fall.; ' on a fast day '; ' but from the statement in 9 we gather that it was not a fixed fast day, but one specially appointed on which the reading took place. If the verses are in the right orderj the margin is accordingly to be preferred. Jeremiah chose a fast day on account of the large numbers that Would be collected from the cities of Judah as well as from the capital, and the chastened and more receptive mood in which the people would be. 7. If their supplication falls before Yahweh (see margin), He will be constrained to take notice of it. for great . . . this people : cf. 2 Kings xxii. 13, Josiah's words when he heard the book of the Law read. 8. This verse gives in summary form what is told at length in the following verses. 9. For the fifth year the LXX reads ' the eighth year,' which has not the slightest claim to acceptance. The delay till the fifth year is difficult enough to understand, but that the reading should be postponed three years longer is quite incredible. The ninth month was a winter month, embracing parts of November and December ; the weather was often cold (cf. 22) and wet (cf. Ezra x. 9). all the people . . . proclaimed a fast. This is the more generally accepted rendering, though some (including Rothstein and Condamin) translate 'they summoned to a fast all the people.' This fast was apparently not held on a stated fast-day but was specially summoned, probably in' connexion with the political situation. JEREMIAH 36. 10-12. B 155 the cities of Judah unto Jerusalem, proclaimed a fast be fore the Lord. Then read Baruch in the book the words l0 of Jeremiah in the house of the Lord, in the chamber of Gemariah the son of Shaphan the scribe, in the upper court, at the entry of the new gate of the Lord's house, in the ears of all the people. And when Micaiah the son of " Gemariah, the son of Shaphan, had heard out of the book all the words of the Lord, he went down into the king's 1 2 house, into the scribe's chamber : and, lo, all the princes sat there, even Elishama the scribe, and Delaiah the son of Shemaiah, and Elnathan the son of Achbor, and IO. The precision with which the locality is defined is evidence that the account proceeds from an eye-witness, no doubt Baruch. Gemariah was one of the sons of Shaphan, who held the very important post of secretary under Josiah, and read to him the Book of the Law which Hilkiah had discovered. If this Shaphan is to be identified with the Shaphan mentioned in xxvi. 24, Gema riah was the brother of Ahikam, Jeremiah's powerful protector, and uncle of Gedaliah. He was, we may assume, friendly to Jeremiah, since his chamber was placed at Baruch's disposal. the upper court : probably to be identified with ' the inner court ' mentioned in 1 Kings vi. 36, vii. 12. For ' the new gate ' see note on xxvi. 10. 11. Micaiah had apparently been left in charge of Gemariah's chamber, while the owner was at the council of princes, if we are to identify the Gemariah in ipwith the Gemariah in 12. Possibly his father had instructed him to report to the council if anything should be said or done that called for official notice. 12. he went down : the palace being lower than the Temple ; contrast xxvi. 10. . Elishama the scribe. If the designation the scribe in to is to be attached to Gemariah, who would thus have succeeded his father Shaphan in the office, we should either have to suppose that he had been superseded by Elishama, or that there were two secretaries. More probably ' the scribe ' in 10 is the designation of Shaphan, so that Gemariah, while a member of the council of princes, did not hold the post of secretary. The secretary^ chamber was attached to the palace rather than the Temple, as is natural with a State official. . , . , . Elnathan the son of Achbor was sent by Jehoiakim to pro cure Uriah's extradition from Egypt. (The note on xxvi. 22 should be consulted.) 136 JEREMIAH 36. 13-15- B Gemariah the son of Shaphan, and Zedekiah the son of 13 Hananiah, and all the princes. Then Micaiah declared unto them all the words that he had heard, when Baruckj 14 read the book in the ears of the people. Therefore all the princes sent Jehudi the son of Nethaniah, the son of Shelemiatr, the son of Cushi, unto Baruch, saying, Take in thine hand the roll wherein thou hast read in the ears of the people, and come. So Baruch the son of Neriah >5 took the roll in his hand; and came unto them. And they Gemariah the son of Shaphan: probably (though some question this) to be identified with the Gemariah of 10. , all the princes : i. e. all the other princes. It is curious that the same phrase should be used twice in the same sentence with a different application. 14. Jehudi . . . Cushi. It is very surprising that a. subordi nate official should have his ancestry mentioned back for three generations. It is rare for even the grandfather to be mentioned, though it might be done, as in the case of Micaiah (11), where the grandfather was a person of distinction, or perhaps to avoid con fusion where several bore the same namej It is noteworthy . in this case that the first and last are not individual but national names, ' Jew ' and ' Cushite.' Hitzig infers that Cushi was an Ethiopian who had been naturalized as a Jew; his son and grandson bore names compounded with Yahweh, expressing their adhesion to His service ; but only in the next generation was full Jewish citizenship possible, and this is expressed in the name Jehudi. This view is accepted by several scholars. On the other hand,'the name Cushi is found in the genealogy of the prophet Zephaniah (Zeph. i. 1), though he can hardly have been a foreigner since, he was the grandson ofHezekiah, probably the king of that name (this accounts for his genealogy going back to the great-grandfather). Duhm supposes that names of this kind are to be explained by circum stances. Cushi might be given to a son born during a journey to Ethiopia, or born of an Ethiopian mother ; Jehudi to a son born after the father's return, to distinguish him from sons born abroad, or to distinguish the son of a Jewish mother from half-brothers born of a foreign mother. Cdrnill and Rothstein prefer to read 'Jehudi the son of Nethaniah, and Shelemiah the son of Cushi,' The alteration to our present text is thought to have been occasioned by the reflection that one messenger alone was wanted, and that in 21 Jehudi alone was sent. There is no evidence, however, to support this change of text, and the sending of two messengers is improbable. JEREMIAH 36. 16-19. B 157 said unto him, Sit down now, and read it in pur ears. So Baruch read it in their ears. Now it came to pass, when 16 they had heard all the words, they turned in fear one toward another, and said unto Baruch, We will surely tell the king of all. these words. And they asked Baruch, 17 saying, Tell us now, How didst thou write all these words at his mouth ? Then Baruch answered them, He pro- 18 nounced all these words unto me with his mouth, and I wrote them with ink in the book. Then said the 19 princes unto Baruch, Go, hide thee, thou and Jeremiah ; 15. Sit down. The courteous treatment accorded to Baruch is noteworthy. Some follow the LXX in pointing the word differ ently, rendering ' Read it again in our ears.' But this is to be rejected. 16. The princes are terrified at the contents of the roll, and feel that they must let the king know. Omit ' unto Baruch,' with the LXX ; the words express the result of their deliberations among themselves. 17. at his mouth. These words should probably be omitted, with the LXX ; they anticipate Baruch's answer. 18. Baruch's answer is intended to assure the princes that the whole roll was word for word Jeremiah's composition; he had simply performed the mechanical task of taking, down the oracles as the prophet dictated them. It is remarkable that Jeremiah's name is not mentioned here, though in a formal statement of this kind it would be expected. We should read, with the LXX and Syriac, ' Jeremiah pronounced.' with ink. The LXX omits the words, which occur here only, probably incorrectly. The detail would seem to Baruch worth mentioning. Giesebrecht reads ' with my hand ; ' Duhm's scoff that the princes would know that he had not written it with his foot is hypercritical, for ^Baruch might quite well have said 'I wrote them with my own hand,' to bring out that he alone had executed the mechanical part of the task (cf. Gal. vi. 11). But there is no need to alter the text. 19. The princes know the king too well, they had the fate of Uriah before them, to be in any doubt as to the reception he would accord to the prophet and his secretary. So they give Baruch timely warning that he and Jeremiah should go into hiding. It is a little remarkable that the king did not issue the order for their arrest as soon as the princes made their report, before he had the roll read to him. 1,58 JEREMIAH 36. 20-23- B 20 and let no man know where ye be. And they went in to the king into the court ; but they had laid up the roll in the chamber of Elishama the scribe ; and they told all the 2 1 words in the ears of the king. So the king sent Jehudi to fetch the roll: and he took it out of the chamber of Elishama the scribe. And Jehudi read it in the ears of the king, and in the ears of all the princes which stood 22 beside the king. Now the king sat in the winter house in the ninth month : and there was afire in the brasier 23 burning before him. And it came to pass, wben Jehudi had read three or four a leaves, that the king cut it with a fOr, columns 20. the court: i. e. the inner court. But this would be open, whereas according to 22 the king was in the winter house. Rothstein and Giesebrecht independently suggested ' into the cabinet,' which involves very slight change. This is accepted by Duhm and Cornill (see also Driver's note) . they had laid up the roll : probably hoping that the king might not ask for it, being content with the oral-report they were going to make to him. 22. The fact that he was in the winter house is mentioned to account for the fire in the brasier, which plays so important a part in the story. The LXX rightly -omits ' in the ninth month ; ' it is a gloss introduced from 9, to explain why the king was in the winter house sitting before the fire. The sense of thelast clause is correctly given in the R.V., but, as the italics suggest, the Hebrew is unsatisfactory. -.. It is, in fact, ungrammatical ; the alteration of one letter {'eth into 'esh, ' fire !) gives the requisite sense. The brasier was placed in the middle of the room. 23. The R.V. does not bring out the meaning. It suggests- that Jehudi read three or four leaves, and then, without hearing more, the king cut the whole roll to pieces and burned it. But 24 implies that the' king heard the whole roll- read. Driver's rendering brings out the sense, ' as often as Jehudi read three or four columns, he cut them!' Had he burnt the whole roll at once the knife would have been less necessary, since the roll could have been tossed on the fire as it was, unless indeed it was too large to burn readily in that wayi As every three or four columns were read, he cut them off and burnt them and let the reading proceed. At the end of the process the whole roll was burned ; the king found -nothing to save from the fire. JEREMIAH 36. 24-27. B IS9 the penknife, and cast it into the fire that was in the brasier, until all the roll was consumed in the fire that was in the brasier. And they were not afraid, nor rent their 24 garments, neither the king, nor any of his servants that heard all these words. Moreover Elnathan and Delaiah 25 and Gemariah had made intercession to the king that he would not burn the roll : but he would not hear them. And the king commanded Jerahmeel a the king's son, and 26 Seraiah the son of Azriel, and Shelemiah the son of Abdeel, to take Baruch the scribe and Jeremiah the prophet: but the Lord hid them. Then the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, after 27 " Or, the son of Hammelech leaves. The margin columns is better. The word literally means ' doors.' A similar usage is found in Arabic and Rabbinical Hebrew. the penknife: literally ' a scribe's knife.' 24. There is perhaps an intentional contrast with the conduct of Josiah when he heard the Law Book read (2 Kings xxii. 11). 25. On the attitude of Elnathan see note on xxvi. 22. The LXX inverts (with a difference in the names) the true sense of the verse. 26. the king's son : probably not the son of Jehoiakim, who was himself barely thirty at the time, but a prince of the blood. but the LOBS hid them.: The LXX reads simply ' but they were hidden.' The Hebrew is finer ; Baruch recognizes in these words that it was due to God's watchful care that their retreat was not discovered. 27-31. Duhm strikes out these verses as due to the redactor. Certainly, apart from the style, there are difficulties. The words of Jehoiakim in 29 were not really uttered by him to Jeremiah, since king and prophet did not meet. The prediction that he should have no successor on the throne was not absolutely true, since his son Jehoiachin did succeed him. But as he reigned only three months, and was then deposed and taken to Babylon, Jeremiah might well have expressed himself in this way ; and the fact that it was not literally fulfilled tells against the view that it is an editorial insertion from xxii. 30. The quotation from the roll is not exact, but it agrees sufficiently with the tenor of Jeremiah's predictions. Erbt more moderately assigns 29-31 to an editor, Rothstein simply a9b-30* ('Thou hast burned . . . king of Judah'). 160 JEREMIAH 36. 28—37. i. BK that the king had burned the roll, and the words which 28 Baruch wrote at the mouth of Jeremiah, ' saying, Take thee again another roll, and write in it all the former words that were in the first roll, which Jehoiakim the 29 king of Judah hath burned. And concerning Jehoiakim king of Judah thou shalt say, Thus saith the Lord : Thou hast burned this- roll, saying, Why hast thou written 1 therein, saying, The king of Babylon shall certainly come and destroy this land; and shall cause to cease from 30 thence man and beast ? Therefore thus saith the Lord concerning Jehoiakim king of Judah : He shall have none to sit upon- the throne of David : and his. dead body shall be cast out in the day to the heat, and in the 31 night to the frost. And I will punish him and his seed and his servants for their iniquity ; and I will bring upon them, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and upon the men of Judah, all the evil that I have pronounced 32 against them, but they hearkened not. Then took Jere miah another roll, and gave it to Baruch the scribe, the son of Neriah; who wrote therein from the mouth of Jeremiah all, the words of the book, which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire : and there were added besides unto them many like words. ¦b 37 [B,] And Zedekiah the son of Josiah reigned as king, 30. On the closing threat see note on xxii. 18, lg(vol. i,pp. 255^6). 32. On the second edition of the roll see vol i, pp. 61, 62. xxxvii. 1-10. Jeremiah Warns Zedekiah that the Chaldeans will Return and Burn Jerusalem. This section gives us an accoant of a deputation sent by Zede kiah to Jeremiah in the interval of relief from the siege occasioned by the coming of the Egyptian army, and the reply the prophet sent to the king. The relation of this narrative to that in xxi hasibeen discussed in the Introduction to that chapter, to which the reader should refer (vol. i, p. 246). Here it need simply be Said that the nar- JEREMIAH 37. 2, 3. BB i6r instead of a Coniah the son of Jehoiakim, whom Nebu chadrezzar king of Babylon made king in the land of Judah. But neither he, nor his servants, nor the people 2 of the land, did hearken unto the words of the Lord, which he spake by the prophet Jeremiah. [B] And Zedekiah the king sent Jehucal tbe son of 3 a See ch. xxii. 24. ratives probably refer to different incidents, xxi to an earlier, xxxvii. I— 10 to a later stage in the conflict. The present story is quite trustworthy and comes to us from the hand.of Baruch, but 1, 2 are presumably editorial, and 3-10 may have been touched by the editor's hand. xxxvii. 1, 2. Zedekiah was appointed by Nebuchadrezzar king in place of Coniah, but neither he nor his people gave heed to the message of Jeremiah. 3-10. Zedekiah sent to Jeremiah to entreat his prayers. Jere miah had not yet been imprisoned, and the news that an Egyptian army was coming had caused the Chaldeans to raise the siege of Jerusalem. Jeremiah sends the answer to the king that the Egyptian army will return to Egypt, while the Chaldeans shall return and burn Jerusalem. Let them not deceive themselves with the delusion that they will abandon the siege. Nay, though the whole army contained none but wounded men, they would rise up and burn the city. xxxvii. 1, 2. It is surprising to find this mention of Zedekiah' s accession at this point in the book, as if he had not been mentioned before. The editor wishes to warn the reader that in the follow ing narratives he is not, as in xxxv, xxxvi, concerned with the reign of Jehoiakim. This may perhaps account for the reading in the LXX, 'instead of Jehoiakim,' the meaning being not neces sarily that Zedekiah was his immediate successor, but m the narrative that now follows the king is not Jehoiakim but Zedekiah If the Hebrew text is original, a scribe may have struck out 'Coniah and' on account of the statement a few verses earlier (xxxvi. 30) that Jehoiakim should have 'none to sit upon the throne.' The statement in 2 is not an appropriate introduction to the king's request for prayer in 3. . 3 The request is like that made by Hezekiah to Isaiah (Isa. xxxvii 3-O. There is this difference : Hezekiah sent when matters Sned most desperate ; Zedekiah when the raising of the siege hadbrought a reprieve. The reply of Jeremiah seems irrelevant to tWeouest It is rather an answer to such a question as, What is the issue 'to be ? Will the Chaldeans abandon their enterprise ? 162 JEREMIAH 37. 4-9- BEB Shelemiah, and Zephaniah the son of Maaseiah. the priest, to the prophet Jeremiah, saying, Pray now unto 4 the Lord our God for us. [B,] Now Jeremiah came in and went out among the people : for they had, npt put 5 him into prison. [B] And Pharaoh's army was come forth out of Egypt : and when the Chaldeans that be sieged Jerusalem heard tidings of them, they brake up 6 from Jerusalem. Then came the word of the Lord 7 unto the prophet Jeremiah, saying, Thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel: Thus shall ye say to the king of Judah, that sent you unto me to inquire of me ; Behold, Pharaoh's army, which is come forth to help you, shall 8 return to Egypt into their own land. And the Chaldeans hall come again, and fight against this city ; and they 9 shall take it, and burn it with fire. Thus saith the Possibly the prayer is understood to be an entreaty for direction rather than for deliverance, as 7 suggests ; possibly the terms of the passage have been influenced by the account in Isa. xxxvii. 2-5/ Jehucal appears a little later as one of Jeremiah's enemies (xxxviii. 1-6). On Zephaniah see notes on xxi. 2, xxix.' a The Pharaoh mentioned is Pharaoh Hophra (590-571 B.C.)- see note on xliv. 30. 1. We do not know why the Egyptian relief army retreated to Egypt- Perhaps it was intimidated at the approach of the Chal deans, and yielded the ground without a struggle; perhaps, as Ezek. xxx. 21 suggests, it had suffered defeat. 9, 10. These verses are no mere addition made because the JEREMIAH 37. io, ii. B 163 Lord : Deceive not a yourselves, saying, The Chaldeans , shall surely depart from us : for they .shall not depart. For though ye had smitten the whole army of the Chal- 10 deans that fight against you, and there, remained but b wounded men among them, yet should they rise up every man in his tent, and burn this city with fire. , And it came to pass that when the army of the Chal- 11 a Heb. your souls. b Heb. thrust through. redactor cannot bring himself to stop. They are expressed in so striking a way, and so apt to the self-deceiving optimism of the Jews, that we may be well assured that Jeremiah spoke them. So certain is the return of the Chaldeans and the destruction of the city, that if the Jews had smitten the whole army of the enemy, and only some desperately wounded (see margin) soldiers were left, they would rise up and burn the city. We should probably connect 'every man in his tent' with 'wounded men,' strike out 'among them,' and read with the LXX 'yet should these rise up.' The point of ' every man in his tent' is perhaps that out of several inmates of a tent, only one survivor was left. All that had hap pened so far was a mere strategic retreat, and already the hopes of the Jews were rising high ; but 'things are what they are, and ' their consequences will be what they will be ; why then should we deceive ourselves ? ' So settled in God's counsel is the city's fate, that even the most crushing defeat of its enemy could not save it from destruction at their hands. xxxvii. 11-21. Jeremiah is Arrested and Imprisoned. Zedekiah Consults him and Ameliorates his Lot. On this incident see vol. i, p. 25. The account is no doubt derived from Baruch's memoirs. xxxvii. 11-15. When the Chaldeans had raised the siege of Jeru salem for fear of the relief army from Egypt, Jeremiah was going into the land of Benjamin, but was arrested by Irijah as a deserter to the enemy, in spite of his denial. The princes beat him and put him in prison. 16-21. After many days' confinement Zedekiah had him brought to the palace, and inquired if there was any message from Yahweh. Jeremiah told him that he should be delivered'into Nebuchadrezzar's hands. He then remonstrated with him on account of :his imprisonment, and pointed to the falsification of the predictions that the enemy would not come against Judah. He added a request that he should not be sent back to the prison to M 2 164 JEREMIAH 37. 12^-14. B deans was broken up from Jerusalem for fear of PharaoKV 12 army, then Jeremiah went forth out of Jerusalem to go into the land of Benjamin, to receive his portion a there, 13 in the midst of the people. And when he was in the gate of Benjamin, a captain of the ward was there, whose name was Irijah, the son of Shelemiah, the son of Hana niah ; and he laid hold On Jeremiah the prOphet, saying, 14 Thou fallest away to the Chaldeans. Then said Jeremiah, It is false; I fall not away to the Chaldeans; but he- hearkened not to him : so Irijah laid hold on Jeremiah, * Heb. from thence. die there. So the king had him removed to the court of the guard, and supplied with bread. xxxvii. 11. The interruption of the siege made it possible for Jeremiah to undertake his journey. 12. The precise object of his journey is uncertain, since the meaning of the Hebrew is not clear, perhaps through textual cor ruption, perhaps through its use of technical language Which does not occur elsewhere. The R.V. gives what is probably the sense. The journey may be connected with an earlier stage of the same business as is recorded in xxxii, or he may have wished to get more money than he had, though at a later time he still had some, as we learn from xxxii. 9. 13. As he was in ' the gate of Benjamin,' on the north side of the city which led into Benjamite territory, he was arrested by the officer on duty, Irijah, a grandson of Hananiah, who is probably not to be identified with Jeremiah's antagonist (xxviii), since the latter was presumably a younger man. Nor are we to identify the bhelemiah here mentioned with the father of Jehucal (3) The charge of desertion was the more plausible that similar desertions seem to have been numerous (xxxviii. 19 : cf. 4, Iii. 1V1 • Jeremiah's advice to desert had perhaps already 9been 'given to theTeople ™,^; f\i' "™- ad-"°t concealed hi's conviction that the city must tall. This conviction was apparently shared by a eood number and there were probably many who strongly objected to he rebellion against Babylon. Those who were more outspoken ' Into prison "°' "** g°°d their escaPe' «^ *«* beenThrus? 14. Jeremiah indignantly denies the charge. On his attitude vol i, C°n2S,St2ency with the a«Mee given to others to desert, See JEREMIAH -37. 15-18. B 165 and brought him to the princes. And the princes were 15 wroth with Jeremiah, and smote him, and put him in prison in the house of Jonathan the scribe; for they had made that the prison. When Jeremiah was come 16 into the "dungeon house, and into the cells, and Jeremiah had remained there many days ; then Zedekiah the king 17 sent, and fetched him : and the king asked him secretly in his house, and said, Is there any word from the Lord ? And Jeremiah said, There is. He said also, Thou shalt be delivered into the hand of the king of Babylon. Moreover Jeremiah said unto king Zedekiah, Wherein 18 ' a Or, house of the pit 15. Iriiah's arrest of the, prophet may have been simply in obedience to his instructions. The decision as to his fate rested with the princes. These princes,- it must be remembered, were not those of Jehoiakim's reign, who had been favourable to Jere miah, since these had for the most part been taken to Babylon, but upstarts who had no experience of government, hot-headed and short-sighted patriots, so inferior in character to their predeces sors that Jeremiah contrasted them with the latter as evil figs with good figs. They no doubt disliked him for his pro-Babylonian attitude ; but'they had been further embittered against him by his unsparing denunciation of the treatment they had accorded to their Hebrew slaves. the house of Jonathan the scribe. Why this was used is not clear. Perhaps the other prisons were full, and a high official might be specially entrusted with such political prisoners as it was desired to keep under the strictest observation. As we gather from 16, Jeremiah was consigned to- an underground dungeon, where he would have, died in due course (20), had the princes had their way. 16. When. Read, with the LXX, ' And Jeremiah came/ and place a full stop at the end of the sentence. cells : or ' vaults.' many days: When he was removed the siege seems to have been resumed. 17. Zedekiah believed in the real inspiration of Jeremiah, and would have followed his counsel had he dared. But he was in terror of the princes, so he could consult the prophet only in secret (cf. xxxviii. 5, 24-27). ... . 18-20. A simple and dignified remonstrance follows on his unjust 156 JEREMIAH 37. 19— 38. t. B have I sinned against thee, or against thy servants, or against this people, that ye have put me in prison? 19 Where now are your prophets which prophesied unto you, saying, The king of Babylon shall not come against 20 you, nor against this land ? And now hear, I pray thee, O my lord the king: let my supplication,-' I pray thee, a be accepted before thee ; that thou cause me not to return to the house of Jonathan the scribe, lest I die 2 1 there. Then Zedekiah the king commanded, and they committed Jeremiah into the- court of the guardy and they gave him daily a loaf of bread out of the bakers' street, until all the bread in the city was spent. Thus Jeremiah remained in the court of the guard. 38 And Shephatiah the son of Mattan, and Gedaliah the 1 Heb. fall. imprisonment ; then he points the moral of the failure of, the false prophets ; and finally he proffers his petition that the king will not send him back to the dungeon, where death will be inevitable, 21. Jeremiah was innocent, and the king recognized this, yet he did not venture to set him free. But he so far brayed the resent ment of the princes as to bring him from the dungeon to the palace and confine him in the court of the guard (see note on xxxii. 2). He also took care for his maintenance, providing him a cake of bread daily. The round cake here indicated was only small, but bread was getting scarcer and scarcer, and it sufficed to keep him alive. bakers' street. In the East those who practise the same trade or business often live in the same street. xxxviii. 1-13. Jeremiah is put into a Dungeon by the Princes, but Rescued by Ebed-melech. Schmidt pronounces this ' manifestly a late legend ' {Enc. Bib. 2388), but critics generally, including Duhm, treat it as a trust worthy narrative from the pen of Baruch, even if to some extent edited. xxxviii. 1-6. Four of the princes heard Jeremiah's wbrds to the people, threatening death to those who stayed in the city, but promising life to those who surrendered, and predicting the capture of the city. They asked the king that he might be put to death, since he weakened the hands of the defenders of the city. JEREMIAH 38. 2-4. B 167 son of Pashhur, and Jucal the son of Shelemiah, and Pashhur the son of Malchiah, heard the words that Jeremiah spake unto all the people, saying, Thus saith the 2 Lord, He that abideth in this city shall die by the sword, by the famine, and by the pestilence : but he that goeth forth to the Chaldeans shall live, and his life shall be unto him for a prey, and he shall live. Thus saith the Lord, 3 This city shall surely be given into the hand of the army of the king of Babylon, and he shall take it. Then the 4 princes said unto the king, Let this man, we pray thee, be The king replied that he was in their hands, since the king had no power against them. So they put Jeremiah into a dungeon, and his feet sank in the mire. 7-13. Ebed-melech the Ethiopian, a palace eunuch, heard of this, and told the king what had been done and that Jeremiah was in danger of speedy death. The king commanded him to get some men to draw him out of the dungeon. So he took rags and let them down to Jeremiah, and he put them under his armholes to cover the ropes. Then they drew him out of the dungeon and he remained in the court of the guard. xxxviii. 1. Of the first two of the princes nothing furtherisknown, except that Gedaliah, who is of course to be distinguished from the governor (xl, xii), might be the son of the Pashhur who beat Jere miah and put him in the stocks (xx. 1-3). Jucal is the same as Jehucal of xxxvii. 3, and Pashhur accompanied Zephaniah on the first deputation sent by Zedekiah to the prophet (xxi. 1). heard . . . people. Although Jeremiah was in confinement, he was not prevented from receiving visitors, as we see from the visit of Hanamel (xxxii) ; and to these; but especially to the soldiers who were on duty, he would have an opportunity of giving his view of the situation ; perhaps more in reply to questions than as a propagandist. . 2. This advice is that given also in almost the same words in xxi. 9 (see the note). Some, including even KOberle, hold that at this stage of the conflict Jeremiah would not have given such advice, though earlier he might have done so, and suppose that the passage has been inserted here from xxi. 9. 4. From their point of view, as men responsible for the defence of the city, they were not unjustified in demanding Jeremiah's death, for his unfaltering predictions of utter disaster were calcu lated to unnerve and discourage the defenders. 168 JEREMIAH 38. 5-7. B put to death ; forasmuch as he weakeneth the hands of the men of war that remain in this city, and the hands of all the people, in speaking such words unto them : for this man seeketh not the welfare of this people, but the 5 hurt. And Zedekiah the king said, Behold, he is in your hand: for the king is not he that can do any thing 6 against you. Then took they Jeremiah, and cast him into the a dungeon of Malchiah * the king's son, that was in the court of the guard : and they let down Jeremiah with cords. And in the dungeon there was no water, but 7 mire : and Jeremiah sank in the mire. Now when Ebed- melech the Ethiopian, an eunuch, which was in the-king's aOr, pit b Or, the son of Hammelech 5- Zedekiah apparently yields, but not fully : he leaves the prophet in their hands, but without permission to inflict the death penalty. He may have expected them to confine him again in the house of Jonathan. Tl^e LXX reports the king's reply as closing with ' hand ; ' the rest is a remark of the narrator, ' for the king was not able to do any things against them.' This is perhaps correct. 6. The princes did not kill Jeremiah outright, perhaps they shrank with superstitious dread from such a deed; but they hit on a plan which they trusted might achieve their purpose as ' well. In the court of the guard there was a cistern belonging to one of the royal house {see on xxxvi. s&). It was usual for a house to have an underground cistern in which water was stored. In this cistern, as it happened, there was no water, but a deep miry sedi ment ; and the prophet was lowered into this by cords, from which we may be sure no rags protected him, and his feet sank in the mire. It is clear from the sequel that the deed was done in the king's absence from the palace (7) and without his knowledge (9, i°)-. 7. It is very striking that- the only one who intervenes to save Jeremiah from the terrible death the princes designed for him was an Ethiopian eunuch. Some think that the women ,of the harem, of whom he may have been in charge, had observed the proceed ing, and informed Ebed-melech. , But it is questionable whether the women's apartments would look on the court of the guard. Whether this was so or not, no sooner did he learn of it than he hastened to tell the king, who was in the gate of Benjamin (see xxxvii. 13), feeling it to be a matter of life and death. JEREMIAH 38. 8-10. B 169 house, heard that they had put Jeremiah in the dungeon ; the king then sitting in the gate of Benjamin ; Ebed- 8 melech went forth out of the king's house, and spake to the king," saying, My lord the king, these men have done 9 evil in all that they have done to Jeremiah the prophet, whom they have cast into the dungeon ; and a he is like to die in the place where he is because of the famine : for there is no more bread in the city. Then the king com- 10 a Heb. he is dead. 9. The LXX gives a different text in the former part of the verse : ' Thou hast acted wrongly in what thou hast done to slay this man.' This is accepted by Rothstein (in Kittel), but the Hebrew is much better ; Zedekiah bad not intended the prophet's death, and his answer to the princes was merely meant as a permission to silence him. It would have been tactless on Ebed-melech's part to accuse the king at a time when he was going to ask for his assistance. and he is like ... in the city. This is a very difficult pas sage. The Hebrew text reads ' and he has died ; ' it is better to omit a letter and read ' he will die,' than to impose an appropriate sense on the present text ; or we might read ' to die ' (so appar ently LXX, but perhaps translating the present text). The last clause of the verse, if literally taken, gives no suitable meaning. If there was no bread in the city there was no point in the action of the princes, since famine would do their work for them ; and for Ebed-melech to rescue him would only have been to doom him to a more lingering death. If there was no more food, he could be supplied with food as little in the court of the guard as in the cistern. But the words are obviously intended to give a reason why he should be rescued at once ; so that we must rather inter pret them as an exaggerated statement of the actual conditions. The point will then be that bread has become so scarce that in the pit in which he is confined Jeremiah will miss even his scanty ration (xxxvii. 21), which itself barely sufficed to keep body and soul together, and will die of hunger. Possibly the food in the city had been commandeered for distribution, so that the prophet's friends would have had no opportunity of helping him. in the place where lie is : better ' on the spot ' : cf. 2 Sam. ii. 23, where it is said of Asahel that he ' died on the spot.' 10. thirty men. The Hebrew is irregular and the number too large, even if so many could be spared from the ranks of the sorely thinned defenders (cf. 4, 'the men of war that remain'). We should read ' three men ; ' these, with Ebed-melech, would be 170 JEREMIAH 38. n-14. 3 manded Ebed-melech the Ethiopian, saying, Take from hence thirty men with thee-, and take up Jeremiah the pro- 11 phet out of the dungeon; before he die. So Ebed-melech took'the men with him, and went into the house of the king under the treasury, and took thence old cast clouts and old rotten fags, and let them down by cords into the 12 dungeon to Jeremiah. And Ebed-melech the Ethiopian said unto Jeremiah, Put now these old cast clouts and rotten rags under thine armholes under the cords. And 13 Jeremiah did so. So they drew up Jeremiah with the cords, and took him up but of the dungeon : and Jeremiah [remained in the court of the guard. 14 ; Then Zedekiah the king sent, and took Jeremiah" the ample for the purpose. The king's language shows that he re cognized the urgency of immediate action. 11. Ebed-melech's thoughtfulness to spare the prophet all needless pain is shown in his provision of rags to save him from being cut by the rope, and then by his letting the rags down to him with ropes that he might not have to grope for them in the mire. The rags he procured .from a lumber-room under the treasury. ... . 12. The LXX reads simply 'And he said, Put these under. the cords, and Jeremiah did so.' Duhm prefers this, thinking that Jeremiah would sit on the rope and not be tormented by being pulled up with the cords under his armholes. But faint with hunger #nd ill usage, it was much better for him to be drawn up as the Hebrew text describes, than risk a fall from the rope as he was being raised ; besides, had he sat on the rope, the provision of rags would have been a cruel refinement of kindness when time was so precious. The delay was worth while to protect the armpits. 13. The princes seem not to have interfered further with the prophet. Probably the end was already very near, and the king grantedhispetitionnotto.be taken back to Ihe house of Jona than (26). xxxviii. 14-28*. Jeremiah's Final Appeal to the King to Surrender. _ This narrative is taken from Baruch's memoirs, and is unques tionably trustworthy. Its information is too precise to come from any but a first-hand source. Probably the interview took place On the same day on which he was rescued by Ebed-melech. The " JEREMIAH 38. 14. B 171 prophet unto him into the third entry that is in the account which the king told him to give must have been plausible, or it would not have satisfied the suspicious princes. 'Had some delay ihtervened between the rescue and the interview, the dread that he might be sent back to his former prison would have been less natural; it was, however, the most natural thing in the world to anticipate that the princes, thwarted in their first attempt on Jeremiah, would avail themselves of the king's permission already accorded them (5) to send him back to the house of Jona than, where he would no longer be able to weaken the defence. The narrative is told without any mention of Jeremiah's petition, so that the inference is suggested that the king simply invented the pretext of the petition in order to conceal the real purpose of the interview. But when we have regard to Baruch's mode of . telling his story, this inference is by no means necessary. It is morethan probable that Jeremiah would use the opportunity to address the king, as he had done before, on this matter of such personal moment to himself, and that the request was actually granted. Accordingly the prophet probably told no actual He, but saved the king by concealing part, and the more important part, of the truth. . xxxviii. 14-18. Zedekiah inquired of Jeremiah if he could reveal anything to him, and swore that he would not kill him or surrender him to his foes. Jeremiah then said that, if he would surrender, his life and the city would be spared. ; if not, it would be burned and he would not escape. 19-23. Zedeltiah replied that he feared the Chaldeans would hand him over to the Jewish deserters. Jeremiah replied that • they would not do so, and besought him to obey, so it Would be well with him. But if he refuse, then the women of the palace shall sing the dirge over him when they are captured. His friends have led him astray, and abandon him now that his feet have sunk in the mire. His wives and children and he himself will be cap tured, and the city will be burned. 24-28* The. king enjoined secrecy on the prophet,, assuring hjm that he should not die. He also told him that if the princes asked what he and the king had said, he was to reply that he had petitioned not to be sent back to Jonathan's house, to die there. So when the princes asked him, he replied as the king commanded, and thus the purport of rthe interview remained unknown. So he stayed in the court of the guard. xxxviii. 14. the third entry. This was no doubt well known to Baruch, but' it is not mentioned elsewhere, nor do we ever read of a first or second entry. Giesebrecht with a slight emend- 178 JEREMIAH 38. 15-1S. B house of the Lord: and the king said unto Jeremiah, 15 I will ask thee a thing; hide nothing from me. Then Jeremiah said unto Zedekiah, If I declare it unto thee, wilt thou not surely put me to death ? and if I give thee 1 6 counsel,, thou wilt not hearken unto me. ; So Zedekiah' the king sware secretly unto Jeremiah, saying, As the Lord liveth, that made us this soul, I will not put thee tod'eath, neither, will I give thee into the hand of these men 17 that seek thy life. Then said Jeremiah unto Zedekiah, Thus saith the Lord, tbe God of hosts, the God of Israel : If thou wilt go forth unto the king of Babylon's princes, then thy soul shall live, and this city shall not be burned 18 with fire; and thou ;shalt live, and thine house : but if ation {mebo' hashshallshlm for mdbo' hashshelishf) gets the sense 'the body-guard's entry,' which is accepted by Duhm. \ P, Haupt, on the other hand, defends the present, text ; he supposes thatthe main entrance on the east was the first entrance, that on the north was the second, that on the south was the third, leading from the Temple to the palace. In the absence of definite information decision between these views is impossible. Clearly it was a place convenient for the king to reach without Observation, and suitable for a secret meeting. The king was like a patient. who begs his doctor to tell him the whole truth, but clings desperately to' the hope of favourable news and is unprepared with any courage for the worst. ' 15. The prophet, has rightly gauged the king's character. If the truth he has demanded should prove unwelcorne, his personal resentment will be provoked, and he' will abandon him to his enemies. So before Jeremiah speaks he expresses his fear to the king. 16. Zedekjah swears by Yahweh the giver of life (an uncom mon oath), both tp the prophet and himself, that he will not cause Jeremiah's life to be taken : may he- lose '.ibis, own if he is false to his path ! secretly: is omitted by the LXX, probably correctly; it should have come at an earlier point. 17. Jeremiah gives the king the advice he had given, to his subjects. The only hope for himself arid the city lies in surren der. He speaks of 'the king of Babylon's princes' because Nebuchadnezzar himself was not in command at Jerusalem. See xxxix. 3, 5. JEREMIAH 38. 19-21. B ift thou wilt not go forth to the king of Babylon's princes, then shall this city be. given into the hand of the Chat " deans, and they shall burn it with fire, and thou shalt not escape out of their hand. And Zedekiah the king 19 said unto Jeremiah, I am afraid of the Jews that are fallen away to the Chaldeans, lest they deliver me into their hand, and they mock me. But Jeremiah said, They 20 shall not deliver thee. Obey, I beseech thee, the voice of the Lord, in that which I speak unto thee : so it shall be well with thee, and thy soul shall live. But -if thou 21 19. Zedekiah shrinks from surrender, lest the Chaldeans deliver him over to the Jews who had deserted and they mishandle him. It was not an imaginary terror. Party spirit no doubt ran high ; those who were opposed to the alliance with Egypt and revolt from Babylon would bitterly resent the ruinous policy for which the king had been responsible, and which its real authors had carried through with such high-handed violence towards its oppo nents. See note on xxxvii. 13. It was not taunts and insults merely that Zedekiah feared, but physical ill-treatment. " 21, 22. If, however, the king refuses to accept these assur ances, then this is the scene which Yahweh.has shown the prdphet. He has seen tbe palace women led out to the princes of Nebu chadnezzar, and singing a lamentation as they went. The dirge is in Qina rhythm, as" Budde points out, and Jeremiah probably pronounced it so as to bring out its real character. But it is questionable if Budde is right in 'supposing that the lines are a well-known dirge, in use among the wailing women. The parallel in Obad. 7 does not prove this, for that passage is later and probably depends on ours. As we read 22 we cannot help being struck with the fact that the metaphor answers to the experience through which the prophet had passed. True, the figure is drawn rather from the fate of a traveller', who against his better judgement has taken a path which has led him into a swamp. But the words ' thy feet are sunk in the mire ' recall so vividly the statement in 6, that.they were probably suggested by the experience itself. And, if so, the vision seems to have flashed oh the prophet even as he was speaking, and the verses to have been improvised. With his clairvoyant faculty he sees the sorrowful procession, the burden of their song, he. heats as a clairaudient, but Only its general tenor ; the form in which he reproduces it is moulded by his own experience. He had been cast by his enemies into the cistern, and his feet had sunk in the mire ; Zedekiah had been mis- 174 JEREMIAH 38- 22-25.. B refuse to go forth, this is the, word that the Lord hath, 22 shewed me: Behold, all the," women that are left, in the king of, Judah's house shall, be: brought forth to the king ... of Babylon's princes, and those women shall say, a Thy familiar friends have 6; 25. In spite of his precautions he fears that riis interview with the prophet will not have gone unobserved, and instructs himliow he is to 'answer the inevitable question of the princes. JEREMIAH 38. 26— 39. 1. BS 175 with thee, and they come unto thee, and say unto thee, Declare unto us now what thou hast said unto the king.; hide it not from us, and we will not put thee to death : also what the king said unto thee : then thou shalt say 26 unto them,, I a presented my supplication before the king, that he would not cause me to return to Jonathan's house, to die there. Then came all the princes unto Jeremiah, 27 and asked him : and he told them according to all these, words that the king had commanded. So they -left off speaking with him ; for the matter was not D- perceived. So Jeremiah abode in the court of the guard until the 28 day that Jerusalem was taken. And it came to pass when Jerusalem was taken, [S] 0 (in 39 » Heb. caused to fall. b Or, reported c See ch. Iii. 4, &c, 2 Kings xxv. 1-12. hide it . . . death : a veiled threat ; if you refuse to disclose it we shall kill you. 26. On this see the Introduction to this section (p. 171), where it is pointed out that Jeremiah probably had made this request to the king during the interview. 27. It fell out as the king had anticipated, and Jeremiah answered as he had been bidden. He probably told the truth, but not the whole truth, and he made a false impression on the princes: Even to-day exponents of ethics dispute how far such conduct.is legitimate. At that time moral standards were very different from our own. And the consequences of a disclosure would have been serious, not for the prophet alone but for the king, who would have felt that his confidences had been betrayed. Duhm has a pene trating discussion of the question. xxxviii. 28b — xxxix. 14. The Capture of Jerusalem and Jeremiah's Fortunes. . This section presents some perplexing phenomena. We have a narrative of the destruction of Jerusalem which goes over a good deal of the ground covered by Iii. In this the main subject is the fate of Zedekiah and the people rather than of Jeremiah. Further 4-13 is omitted in the LXX. Chap, xxxix. 1, 2 is inserted in the middle of a sentence between xxxviii. 28b and xxxix. 3. These two verses are probably an insertion. They take us back in ito a point in the history which we have left far behind, and they are 176 JEREMIAH 39. i. S the ninth year of Zedekiah king of Judah, in the tenth an 'abridgement of Hi. 4-7. When they "are removed xxxviii. 28b and xxxix. 3 form a single well-connected sentence. The question as to 4-13 is more difficult. This falls into two main divisions, 4-10 and 11-13, the latter of which is concerned with the lot of Jeremiah. The former is very generally regarded as an interpo lation on the following grounds. It is absent in the LXX, and is an abridgement of Hi. 7-16. It does not connect well with 3, for obviously ^Zedekiah did not wait till he saw that the Babylonian princes had taken their seat (4), but took to flight as soon as he knew that a breach had been made in the walls (Iii. 7). Nor can one explain why the princes mentioned in 3 are left out of account in what follows. 11-13 is more relevant to the author's purpose, since it is concerned with Jeremiah, and some who regard 4-10 as an interpolation take another view of 11-13: Still there are grave reasons against accepting, its authenticity. It is possible that Nebuchadnezzar had personally interested himself in the prophet, but it is hardly likely. Verse 1 1 does not connect well with 3, since Nebuzaradan is not enumerated among the princes in 3, and according to Iii. 12 did not reach Jerusalem till a month later. It is also absent in the LXX. When 1,3, 4-13 have been eliminated, we have a narrative to which nd serious objection can be taken in xxxviii. 21", xxxix. 3, 14, which relates what the reader of the memoir would be anxious to learn, how Jeremiah fared after the capture of the city. Schmidt, it is true, strikes out the whole as 'manifestly unhistorical ' {Enc. Bib. 2388). A clever attempt to secure more of 4-13 for the memoirs may be seen in Rothstein's introduction to the section in Kautzsch. xxxviii. 28b-xxxix. 3. When Jerusalem was captured (Nebu chadnezzar came against it in the tenth month of Zedekiah's ninth year, and a breach was made in- the walls in the fourth month of his eleventh year), the princes of Nebuchadnezzar sat in the middle gate. 4-10. When Zedekiah and his warriors saw them, they fled by night by way of the Arabah, but he was overtaken by the Chaldeans in the plains of Jericho and taken to Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah, who slew his sons and all the nobles of Judah, blinded Zedekiah and bound him in fetters. The Chaldeans burned the palace and the city, and broke down the walls. Then Nebuzar adan carried the rest of the people, including the deserters, to Babylon, but left the poor who had nothing and gave them lands. 11-14. Nebuchadnezzar had charged Nebuzaradan to take care of Jeremiah, so he and the princes sent and fetched him from the court of the guard, and entrusted him to Gedaliah, who set him at liberty. JEREMIAH 39. 2-5. SBS 177 month, came Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon and all his army against Jerusalem, and besieged it ; in the eleventh 2 year of Zedekiah, in the fourth month, the ninth day of the month, a breach was made in the city :) [B] that all 3 the princes of the king of Babylon came in, and sat in the middle gate, even Nergal-sharezer, Samgar-nebo, Sarse- chim, a Rab-saris, Nergal-sharezer, a Rab-mag, with all the rest of the princes of the king of Babylon, [s]. And it 4 came to pass that when Zedekiah the king of Judah and all the men of war saw them, then they fled, and went forth out of the city by night, by the way of the king's garden, by the gate betwixt the two walls : and he went out the way of the Arabah. But the army of the Chal- .5 deans pursued after them, and overtook Zedekiah in the plains of Jericho : and when they had taken, him, they brought him up to Nebucbadrezzar king of Babylon to a Titles of officers. xxxix. 1,2: taken from Iii. 4-7. . 3. When the city was captured, the Babylonian princes sat' in the middle gate, the situation of which is unknown, to administer .affairs, and then sent to release Jeremiah (14). The names create difficulties. There are four names, the third and fourth of which haye official designations appended; Of these four names the first and fourth are identical and probably duplicates. In 13 only two princes (apart from Nebuzaradan) are mentioned, and Nebushazban is there said to be the Rab-saris, the name given to the holder of the office in 3. Sarsechim is inexplicable. Samgar is perhaps, as Giesebrecht suggests, a corruption for Sar-mag= Rab-mag, and is to.be omitted as a doublet, while -nebo Sarsechim is probably a corrupt form of Nebushazban (13). Accordingly two 'princes are mentioned whose names and titles are correctly give.n,.in 13. Rab-saris may mean ' chief of the eunuchs,' but more probably ' chief of the heads ' {rabursa-resi) , i. e. ' chief of the principal men ;' Rab-mag is commonly explained to mean ' chief of the, sooth sayers,' but may mean ' chief of princes.' 4. The extract from Iii. 4-16 begins here and continues to 10. See Introduction, to this section. For the exegesis see Dr. Skinner's Commentary on Kings ; as explained in the Intro-: duction to the notes on Jer. Iii. ... 11 N i7.8 JEREMIAH 39. 6-14. SB Riblah in the land of Hamath, and he a gave judgement 6 upon him. Then the king of Babylon slew the sons of Zedekiah in Riblah before his eyes : also the king of 1 Babylon slew all the nobles of Judah. Moreover he put out Zedekiah's eyes, and bound him in fetters, to carry 8 him to Babylon. And the Chaldeans burned the king's house, and the houses of the people, with fire, and brake 9 down the walls of Jerusalem; Then Nebuzaradan the h captain of the guard carried away captive into Babylon the residue of the people that remained in the cityj the deserters also, that fell away to him, and the residue of the 10 people that remained. But Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard left of the poor of the people, which had nothing, in the land of Judah, and gave them vineyards and fields 11 at the same time. Now Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon gave charge concerning Jeremiah to Nebuzaradan the 12 captain of the guard, Baying, Take him, and look well to him, and do him no harm ; but do unto him even as he 13 shall say unto thee. So Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard, sent, and Nebushazban, Rab-saris, and Nergal- sharezer, Rab-mag, and all the chief officers of the king of 14 Babylon ; [b] they sent, and took Jeremiah out of the * Heb. spake judgements with him. See ch. xii. 1. b See Gen. xxxvii; 36. 11, 12. If the account here is historical, we must suppose that Nebuchadnezzar had learned of Jeremiah's efforts to maintain peace, his advice to the Jews to surrender, and his unshaken con fidence in the victory of Babylon. This is by no means impossible, but its probability is dubious. 13. See on 3 ; we have seen that this verse gives a more correct account of the officials and their titles. 14. This verse connects directly with 3. The two princes there mentioned, in the corrected text, had Jeremiah brought from the Court of the guard and handed him over to Gedaliah, whose father Ahikam had early in Jehoiakim's reign protected the prophet (xxvi. 24). Presumably he had taken Jeremiah's advice and sur- JEREMIAH 39. i5l 16. B 179 court of the guard, and committed him unto Gedaliah the son of Ahikam, the son of Shaphan, that he should carry him home : so he dwelt among the people. Now the word of the Lord came unto Jeremiah, 15 while he was shut up in the court of the guard, saying, Go, and. speak to Ebed-melech the Ethiopian, saying, 16 Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel : Behold, I will bring my words upon this city for evil, rendered to the Chaldeans, and from him they had probably learnt about the prophet's attitude. carry him home: i.e. probably to his own home, but the Hebrew is unusual and ambiguous. The last clause seems to mean that he could move freely among the people, he was a prisoner no longer. xxxix. 15-18. A Promise of Safety to Ebed-melech. The authenticity of this section is denied not only by Schmidt, who regards the story of the rescue itself as unhistorical, but also by Duhm, who is followed by Erbt and Cornill. Duhm's judgement is influenced to some extent by his view that the women of the harem had imagined that the princes were getting rid of Jeremiah so as to have one less mouth to feed, and that Ebed-melech had shared this naive opinion, so had saved him from pity, rather than as a.pious person who had trusted in God (18). This ingenious romance rests on no solid foundation, and Cornill relies simply on its inappropriate position in the book, and its insignificant content. Itjis of course, as Giesebrecht says, impossible to prove the authenticity, but there is no adequate reason for denying it. Opposite inferences might be drawn from the parallelism with the address to Baruch (xiv). We should, it is true,have expected it to follow xxxviii. 13 or xxxviii. 28 a. But the editor is responsible for the arrangement, and he may have wished to carry the story on without interruption to the deliverance of Jeremiah after the siege. Probably it is chronologically later than xxxviii. 27. xxxix. i5-r8. While he was in the court of the guard, Yahweh bade Jeremiah tell Ebed-melech that He was bringing evil upon the city, but would deliver him, and he should not be delivered into the power of those whom he feared... His life should be spared, because he trusted in God. xxxix. 16. and they . . . day. The LXX omits the Words, Which have probably, arisen through dittography of the opening words of 17. N 2 180 JEREMIAH 39. 17— 40. i. BE and not for good ; and they a shall be accomplished 1 7 before thee in that day. But I will deliver thee in that day, saith the Lord : and thou shalt not be given into 18 the hand of the men of whom thou art afraid. For I will surely save tbee, and thou shalt not fall by the sword, but thy life shall be for a prey unto thee : because thou hast put thy trust in me, saith the Lord. 40 [B] The word which came to Jeremiah from the Lord, after that Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard had let * Or, shall be before thee 17. the men ...afraid: perhaps the Babylonians (as 18 suggests), but the phrase itself suits better the princes, whose vengeance for his interference he might well dread. 18. thy life . . . prey : see note on xxi. 9, and cf. the promise to Baruch (xiv. 5). xl. 1-6. Jeremiah, after his Release by Nebuzaradan, Prefers to Remain in Palestine. This passage, apart from 6, is regarded by Duhm, Erbt, and Cornill as a legend, connected with xxxiv. 11, 12. But it was by no means impossible for the situation described to arise. When Nebuzaradan; a month after the capture of the city, arrived at Jeru salem, Gedaliah seems to have gone to Mizpah. Jeremiah remained in the city, and was put in fetters with the other citizens. By the time the prisoners reached Ramah, Gedaliah would have heard of Jeremiah's case and intervened. The Babylonian officer may have been quite ignorant about Jeremiah ; or he may have known of him either directly from Nebuchadnezzar, as we are told in xxxix. 1 1-13, or from the deserters. In any case it needed but an explana tion to secure his liberty. It is difficult, however, to think that the address of Nebuzaradan to Jeremiah is an authentic report so far - as ab, 3 with their familiar phraseology are concerned. xl. r-6. At Ramah Nebuzaradan took Jeremiah, who was in chains with the prisoners, and said that Yahweh had punished the people for their sins. He, would release him and permit him" his choice to go to Babylon or to remain with Gedaliah." So Jeremiah went to Gedaliah at Mizpah. xl. 1. The opening words are due to the editor and are entirely inappropriate, since no oracle follows (see note on xxxi. 15-32). JEREMIAH 40. 2-5. RBSB 181 him go from Ramah, [B] when he had taken him being bound in chains among all the captives of Jerusalem and Judah, which were carried away captive unto Babylon. And the captain of the guard took Jeremiah, and said 2 unto him, [s] The Lord thy God pronounced this evil upon this place : and the Lord hath brought it, and 3 done according as he spake; because ye have sinned against the Lord, and have not obeyed his voice, there fore this thing is come upon you. [B] And now, behold, 4 I loose thee this day from the chains which are upon thine hand. If it seem good unto thee to come with me into Babylon, come, and I will look well unto thee ; but if it seem ill unto thee to come with me into Babylon, forbear: behold, all the land is before thee; whither it seemeth good and a convenient unto thee to go, thither go. Now while he was not yet gone back, Go back then, 5 * Or, right Samah : see note on xxxi. 15. The captives probably halted here for the final arrangements to be made for their journey to Babylon. 2, 3. Here the heathen governor instructs Jeremiah in the latter's own theology. 4, Nebuzaradan sets him free from the manacles which fettered his hands, and gives him his choice of accompanying him to Baby lon, where he will be treated with honour, or remaining in his own country. 5. Now while he was not yet gone back. The Hebrew is strange, and many attempts to explain it have been offered. The words are absent in the LXX ; they seem to be a gloss, which is itself corrupt. The following words then connect with 4 and develop the second alternative offered to the prophet. If he decides to remain in Palestine, then let him go to Gedaliah and share in the task of building up the community under the new conditions. But that the prophet may feel that he has unrestricted liberty of action, the captain adds that if neither of the suggestions is to his mind, let him go wherever he wishes. We are not told what Jeremiah said in reply, but no doubt he signified his inten tion to remain. So the captain gave him 'victuals,' i.e., as the word means, food for his journey, and a present, i.e. to show him 182 JEREMIAH 401 6, 7. B said he, to Gedaliah the son of Ahikam, the son of Shaphan, whom the king of Babylon hath made governor over the cities of Judah, and dwell with him among the people : or go wheresoever it seemeth a convenient unto thee - to go. So the captain of the guard gave him 6 ^ victuals and a present, and let him go. Then went Jeremiah unto Gedaliah the son of Ahikam to Mizpah, and dwelt with him among the people that were left in the land. 7 ° Now when all the captains of the forces which were * Or, right b Or, an allowance c See 2 Kings, xxv. 23, 24. honour and provide for his necessities in. the near future. Perhaps ' victuals and ' should be omitted, [as by LXX : the journey was short. 6. The choice of Jeremiah was probably determined by the thought that his place was rather with Gedaliah and the remnant than with the exiles. He looked forward to a complete restoration of the nation ; and since its future home was to be in Palestine, he felt that Providence called him tq remain in the land where he had so long laboured and build up the nucleus of the new Israel, and not at his age to begin a new life in Babylon. A sense of personal loyalty to Gedaliah, whom he might guide in his task, may also have moved him. Mizpah : a city of Benjamin, lying from four to five miles north-west of Jerusalem, on the hill now called Neby Samwil. xl. 7— xii. 3. Gedaliah is Murdered by Ishmael. Schmidt says ' xl. 7— xii. 18 must have been taken from another source than the biography. The lifelikeness of the story is much praised, and it is generally used as an authentic account by modern historians. Literary critics are still apt to be deceived by vividness of description, local' colour, names and dates, and charmed into forgetfulness of the most glaring inconsistencies and historical impossibilities. Such inconsistencies and impossibilities are not wanting in this story. A confused memory of the first Chaldean governor, and of an abortive attempt by a side branch of the Davidic farijily to overthrow .the new government, and local legends clustering about the cistern of Asa and the pool of Gibeon, may he ?t its foundation ; but in its present form it cannot well De earlier than the second century' {Enc. Bib. 2386). This drastic judgement is not shared by others, but while attributing the narrative to Baruch all are agreed that it presents very diffi- JEREMIAH 40. 7. B 183 in the fields, even they and their men, heard that the cult problems. A plausible explanation can be offered for Ishmael's murder of Gedaliah. It is questionable whether Baalis instigated him, in spite of Johanan's statement to that effect. Ishmael belonged to the house of David, and may have resented the appointment of Gedaliah, who did not belong to the royal house. But he seems to have been a strong adherent of the anti-Babylonian party, and would thus be politically opposed to Gedaliah and to the settle ment of the country Under Chaldean rule. It is true that his action was not only inexcusable but irrational. He could not hope to help his people's cause by a deed which was likely to exasperate the Babylonians. But it is., not without other examples that a defeated party should express its patriotism by blind violence reacting most injuriously on its own cause. Much more inex plicable is the career of violence on which he entered after he had murdered Gedaliah. The sorrow of the pilgrims over the downfall of Jerusalem should have appealed to his sympathies, unless it seemed a reflection on the policy of the war-party which had involved such ruin. The sparing of the ten men who offered to disclose the stores they had hidden, might be due to desire for plunder, or to the anticipation that if he could initiate a guerilla warfare against the Chaldeans, such stores would be useful. The killing of the other seventy admits of no rational explanation ; one is almost tempted to think that there was an abnormal strain in Ishmael's personality. That eighty men, though unarmed, should tamely let themselves be overpowered by eleven, men, and that seventy should be butchered, apparently without resistance, is also remarkable. And similarly right through' the history this small company of bandits has it all its own way till Johanan's rescue-party forces it to escape into Ammon. We are not justi fied on account of these difficulties in denying the historicity of the narrative, but we must renounce the attempt at any rational explanation of it. xl. 7-T3. When the captains heard that Gedaliah had been made governor, and that the Jews who were left in Judah were committed to his care, they came to him at Mizpah. He ex horted them to be loyal to the Chaldeans, to gather fruits and dwell in their cities. And the Jews who had taken refuge in the surrounding countries came to Gedaliah and gathered much r 15-16. Johanan and the captains warn Gedaliah that Baalis the king of Ammon has sent Ishmael to kill him, but Gedaliah refuses to believe it. Then Johanan offers to kill Ishmael, to avoid the ruin that would follow on Gedaliah's murder. But Gedaliah forbids him, treating his accusation as a slander on Ishmaeh 184 JEREMIAH 40. 8-10. B king of Babylon had made Gedaliah the son of Ahikam governor in the land, and had committed unto him men, and women, and children, aand of the poorest of the land, of them that were not carried away captive to 8 Babylon ; then they came to Gedaliah to Mizpah, even Ishmael the son of Nethaniah, and Johanan and Jonathan the sons of Kareah, and Seraiah the son of Tanhumeth, and the sons of Ephai the Netophathite, and Jezaniah 9 the son of the Maacathite, they and their men.. And Gedaliah the son of Ahikam the son of Shaphan sware unto them and to theh men,, saying, Fear not to serve the Chaldeans : dwell in the land, and serve the king 10 of Babylon, and it shall be well with yOu. As for me, behold, I will dwell at Mizpah, to stand before the s Or, even xii. ' 1-3. In the seventh month Ishmael, accompanied by ten men, after' being entertained by Gedaliah, murders him and all the Jews and Chaldeans that were with him. xl. 7-9 are repeated in an abbreviated form in 2 Kings xxv. 23, 24. The Babylpnians had not thought it worth while to scour the country and collect all the scattered bands of Jews that had been in arms against them. These now made their submission to Gedaliah. Jonathan is omitted in Kings, but whether rightly is uncertain. Netophah seems to have been a village on the east of Bethlehem, now Beit Nettif (Neh. vii. 26, xii. 28, 1 Chron. ii. 54). Maacahlay to the south-east of Hernion. 9. The LXX and 2 Kings xxv. 24 give a better text, ' Fear not because of the servants of the Chaldeans,' i. e. such Babylonian officials as were left on dutyin various parts of the land. 10. to stand before. In xv. 19, xxxv. 19 the phrase means ' to be engaged in the service of.' If that is the meaning here, the point is that Gedaliah has his residence at Mizpah, that he may serve the interests of such Chaldeans as may come to him. The sense required is, however, that he should serve the interests of the Jews entrusted to his care. He would, itis true, have an oppor tunity of doing this as servant of the Chaldeans, but the main point would thus be implied rather than expressed. We should accordingly interpret as in xv, 1.. where it means 'to intercede.' JEREMIAH 40. n-14. B 185 Chaldeans, which shall come unto us : but ye, gather ye wine and summer fruits and oil, and put them in your vessels, and dwell in your cities that ye have taken. Likewise when all the Jews that were in Moab, and n among the children of Ammon, and in Edom.and that were in all the countries, heard that the king of Babylon had left a remnant of Judah, and that he had set over them Gedaliah the son of Ahikam, the son of Shaphan; then all the Jews returned out of all places whither they 12 were driven, and came to the land of Judah, to Gedaliah, unto Mizpah, and gathered wine and summer fruits very much. Moreover Johanan the son of Kareah, and all the 13 captains of the forces that were in the fields, came to Gedaliah to Mizpah, and said unto him, Dost thou know 14 that Baalis the king of the children of Ammon hath sent gather ye wine . . . oil. The city had been captured in the fourth month ; a month later Nebuzaradan had come to wind up the affairs of the conquered kingdom. Gedaliah was killed in the seventh month, according to Jewish tradition on the third of the month. That in so short a time it should have been possible to gather such quantities of grapes, olives, and summer fruits as they appear from 12 to have done, is a remarkable testimony to tie extent to which the Babylonians had risen above the methods of barbarism which characterized ancient and have characterized so much modern warfare. The fruit trees had been spared, and the fruit would be just ripe. ye have taken : better ' ye will take ; ' up to the present they had been ' in the fields ' (7). 13. that were in the fields : probably a scribe's addition from 7 ; matters had since altered. 14. Baalis may have been king of Ammon when the five kings sent ambassadors to Zedekiah to negotiate an alliance against Babylon (xxvii. 3). If so, he would have a grudge against those who had thwarted the project. But this would hardly account for his instigation of the assassination, and it is not easy to see what advantage he hoped to reap from it. Johanan may have been mistaken. Gedaliah's refusal to believe the charge confirms the impression of his noble character which we should otherwise derive from the narrative. 186 " JEREMIAH 40. 15— 41. 2. B Ishmael the son of Nethaniah to take thy life ? But 15 Gedaliah the son of Ahikam believed them not. Then Johanan the son of Kareah spake to Gedaliah in Mizpah secretly, saying, Let me go, I pray thee, and I will slay Ishmael the son of Nethaniah, and no man shall know it : wherefore should he take thy life, that all the Jews which are gathered unto thee, should be scattered, and 16 the remnant of Judah perish? But Gedaliah the son of Ahikam said unto Johanan the son of Kareah, Thou shalt not do, this thing: for thou speakest falsely of Ishmael. 41 aNow it came to pass in the seventh month, that Ishmael the son of Nethaniah, the son of Elishama, of the seed royal, and one of the chief officers of the king, and ten men with him, came unto Gedaliah the son of Ahikam to Mizpah ; and there they did eat bread 2 together in Mizpah. Then arose Ishmael the. son of Nethaniah, and the ten men that were with him;; and smote Gedaliah the son of Ahikam the son of Shaphan with the sword, and slew him, whom the king of Babylon 1 See 2 Kings xxv. 25. 15. Johanan saw clearly the chaos that would result from tbe murder of Gedaliah, on whom the future of the little community depended, and felt himself justified in offering to remove him secretly. To this Gedaliah could not assent, for he would not believe evil of Ishmael ; and even had he shared Johanan's opinion, he would hardly have protected himself by secret murder. Pro bably he would have taken effective precautions. xii. 1. Cf. 2 Kings xxv. 25. in the seventh month. The Jews kept the fast for Gedaliah on the third of this month, and this probably preserves a correct tradition of the date of the murder. and one . . . king-. If the words are authentic the R.V, is probably correct in inserting 'one of,' since Ishmael was accom panied only by ten men (2), and chief officers of the king in addition were certainly not with him. But the words are omitted JEREMIAH 411 3-5. B 187 had made governor over the land. Ishmael also slew 3 all the Jews that were with him, even with Gedaliah, at Mizpah, and the Chaldeans that were found there, even the men of war. And it came to pass the second day 4 after he had slain Gedaliah, and no man knew it, that 5 in LXX and 2 Kings xxv. 25 (which, however, abbreviates), and should probably be omitted. 3, even the men of war. The LXX omits these words, proba bly rightly ; had Babylonian soldiers been there, the massacre would hardly have been accomplished so easily. xii. 4-18. Ishmael, after further Atrocities, Forced to Retreat to Ammon. Nothing need be added to what has been said in the Introduction to the previous section. xii. 4-10. The following day Ishmael met eighty pilgrims, and invited them to come to Gedaliah. When they came into the city he slew them and cast them intp the pit, with the exception of ten men who offered to show him hidden stores of food. The pit which he filled with dead bodies was that made by Asa. Then he carried off all the rest of the people who were left in Mizpah, to go to the land of Ammon. n-18. When Johanan and the captains heard of Ishmael's doings they pursued him and came up with him at Gibeon. The captives joined Johanan, but Ishmael escaped with eight men to the Ammonites. Then Johanan and the captains took those whom they had rescued near to Bethlehem, purposing for fear of the Chaldeans to go to Egypt. xii. 4. the second day : i.e. probably what we should call the next day. Ishmael took precautions that no one outside of Mizpah. should learn of the massacre. 5. It is remarkable that these pilgrims came from what was formerly the Northern Kingdom, where no doubt many Israelites remained, but blended with foreign settlers. The sanctuary to which they were coming was not, as some suppose, at Mizpah, for ' the house of the Lord ' must refer to Jerusalem. Any purpose they meant to serve at Mizpah could have equally well been accomplished at home, andthe narrative suggests that they would not have entered Mizpah at all but for Ishmael's invitation. We are not to press the phrase 'the- house of the Lord ' to mean, that these pilgrims had not even heard that the Temple was destroyed; their whole attitude of mourning is eloquent as to-their knowledge of this. When the structure was destroyed the site still re- 188 JEREMIAH 41. 6-8. B there came certain from Shechem, from Shiloh, and from Samaria, even fourscore men, having their beards shaven and their clothes rent, and having cut themselves', with a oblations and frankincense in their hand, to bring 6 them to the house of the Lord. And Ishmael the son of Nethaniah went forth from Mizpah to meet them, weeping all along as he went : and it came to pass, as he met them, he said unto them, Come to Gedaliah the 7 son of Ahikam. And it was so, when they came into the midst of the city, that Ishmael the son of Nethaniah slew them, and cast them into the midst of the pit, he, 8 and the men that were with him. But ten men were a Or, meal offerings mained sacred, and it is possible that some sort of cultus may have been carried on there during the exile. The pilgrims were going to offer not an animal but a vegetable offering together with frankincense. For Shiloh the LXX reads Salem, but though accepted by several who compare Gen. xxxiii. 18, the Hebrew is probably to be preferred. In token of deep mourning for the fate of Jerusalem they had shaved the beard, rent their clothes, and gashed themselves (cf. xvi. 6). 6. weeping- all along as he went. If the text is correct Ishmael weeps in pretended sympathy. But this theatrical ex hibition might well have struck the pilgrims as protesting too much. The LXX, ' as they were going along and weeping,' is much better. Giesebrecht's objection that this should have been mentioned in 5 is plausible, but incorrect. For the description in 5 refers to the dress they wore and the signs of mourning they displayed throughout their journey ; the weeping is not a continuous action, but a short though passionate outburst. And when we consider the circumstances this clause adds a most effective touch to the picture. For from Mizpah they catch sight of the ruined city, their first sight Of its desolation, and burst into unrestrained wailing. We are naturally reminded of Luke xix. 41. 7. Having thus enticed them into the midst of the city, and probably into a situation where they were in a trap, Ishmael and his companions slew them. The reason for this atrocity cannot be conjectured with any confidence. (See the Introduction to the previous section, p. 183.) 8. His reason for sparing the ten men is uncertain : see the JEREMIAH 41. 9-12. B 189 found among them that said unto Ishmael, Slay us not : for we have stores hidden in the field, of wheat, and of barley, and of oil, and of honey. So he forbare, and slew them not among their brethren. Now the pit 9 wherein Ishmael cast all the dead bodies of the men whom he had slain, by the side of Gedaliah, (the same was that which Asa the king had made for fear of Baasha king of Israel,) Ishmael the son of Nethaniah filled it with them that were slain. Then Ishmael carried away 10 captive all the residue of the people that were in Mizpah, even the king's daughters, and all the people that remained in Mizpah, whom Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard had committed to Gedaliah the son of Ahikam : Ishmael the son of Nethaniah carried them away captive, and departed to go over to the children of Ammon. But when Johanan the son of Kareah, and all the 11 captains of the forces that were with him, heard of all the evil that Ishmael the son of Nethaniah had done, then they took all the men, and went to fight with 12 Introduction. It is still quite common for farmers in Palestine to store grain and other produce in pits, and it is to such stores that allusion is here made. (See Thomson, The Land and the Book, pp. 509, 510.) - 9. The appropriate climax was reached with the throwing of the dead bodies of his victims into the great cistern with which Asa had furnished Mizpah when he built it as a fortress against Baasha (1 Kings xv. 22). A cistern of this kind was necessary if a stronghold situated at the height of Mizpah was not to be forced by thirst to surrender. The cistern was ceremonially defiled and rendered useless by Ishmael's act. by the side of Gedaliah. The Hebrew is unintelligible. The LXX reads 'was a great pit;' the difference in the Hebrew is slight, and the LXX obviously gives the true text. 10. the King's daughters : not necessarily the daughters of Zedekiah, but the princesses of the royal hOuse. They were related to Ishmael; the others he would take as hostages or perhaps to sell into slavery. It is noteworthy that the Chaldeans had left princesses of the blood in Palestine. 12. Gibeon : i. e. el-Jib, about a mile to the north of Mizpah : see iqo JEREMIAH 41. 13-17. B Ishmael the son of Nethaniah, and fourid him by the 13 great waters that are in Gibeon. Now it came to pass that when alL the people which were with Ishmael saw : Johanan the son of Kareah, and all the captains of the 14 forces that were with him, then they were glad. So all the people that Ishmael had carried away, captive from Mizpah cast about and returned, and went unto Johanan 15 the son of Kareah. But Ishmael the son of Nethaniah escaped from Johanan. with eight men, and went to the 16 children of Ammon. Then took Johanan the son of Kareah, and all the captains of the forces that were with him, all the remnanfrof the people whom he had recovered from Ishmael the son of Nethaniah, from Mizpah, after that he had slain Gedaliah the son' of Ahikam, even the men of war, and the women, and the children, and the 1 7 eunuchs, whom he had brought again from Gibeon : and xxviii. 1. The ' waters ' are apparently to be identified with the pool mentioned in 2 Sam. ii. 13, the scene; of the ghastly contest between twelve soldiers of Joab's army and twelve of Abher's. 14. Apparently the slender force of Ishmael could exercise no adequate control over such a train of captives, and would be suffi ciently concerned on its own account to escape the vengeance of Johanan. As it was, not only did the captives escape, but Ishmael lost two of his men. cast about : an archaism meaning ' turned about,' ' turned round.' 16. The text must be corrupt, since ' from Mizpah ' is unsuitable, Hitzig has restored the true text by a slight change, ' all the rem nant of the people whom Ishmael ... . had carried away captive from Mizpah.' Probably we should strike out ' even the men of war ' as an incorrect gloss on the preceding word. There would hardly be soldiers in the company of captives. Ebed-melech may have been one of the eunuchs ; they would, be in charge of the princesses. 17. Geruth Chimham is not mentioned elsewhere. Chimham is probably to be identified with the son of Barzillai who befriended David on his flight from Absalom (2 Sam. xix. ,37-40). Geruth is a word which occurs here only ; it is explained to mean ' khan ' or 'lodging place' (so margin), but this is very dubious, and we JEREMIAH 41. 18—42. i. B 191 they departed, and dwelt in a Geruth Chimham, which is by Beth-lehem, to go to enter into Egypt, because of the 18 Chaldeans : for they were afraid of them, because Ish mael the son of Nethaniah had slain Gedaliah the son of Ahikam, whom the king of Babylon made governor over the land. Then all the captains of the forces, and Johanan the 42 a Or, the lodging place of Chimham should probably read, with Aquila and Josephus and most recent scholars, Gidroth, i. e. ' sheep-folds.' xiii. 1 — xliii. 7. Against God's Will as Declared by Jeremiah, the People Migrate to Egypt. Schmidt naturally regards this section, and the whole story of the migration to Egypt and the incidents said to have happened there, as historically very dubious. Generally it is assigned to Baruch, though Duhm and others suppose that the supplementer has been at work in Jeremiah's reply. In any case the narrative itself is thoroughly trustworthy. xiii. 1-6. The captains and people ask Jeremiah to pray for direction, and he promises to do so and declare faithfully Yahweh's answer. They promise that they will obey, whatever the answer may be. 7-22. After ten days the word of Yahweh came to the prophet, and he announced it to the people. If they will abide in the land Yahweh will build them up, and the king of Babylon will not molest them. But if they determine to go into Egypt, instead of the peace and plenty they thus hope to secure, sword and (amine shall overtake them, and they shall die there. As Yahweh's anger has been poured on the Jews in Jerusalem, so it will be on the Jews in Egypt. They had dealt deceitfully in asking for Yahweh's direction and promising to fulfil it, and then disobeying. xliii. 1-7. The qaptains and proud men replied to Jeremiah that he lied in claiming to speak in Yahweh's name ; it was at the insti gation of Baruch, and death and captivity at the hands of the Babylonians would be the result. So they took all the people, including Jeremiah and Baruch, to Tahpanhes in Egypt. alii. 1. It is remarkable that in the story of Ishmael's atrocities no reference is made to Jeremiah or Baruch. It is, however, probable that they were under Gedaliah's protection, and carried 192 JEREMIAH 42. 2-6. B son of Kareah, and a Jezaniah the son of Hoshaiah, and all the people from the least even unto the greatest, came a near, and said unto Jeremiah. the prophet, Le.t, we pray thee, our supplication b be accepted before thee, and pray for us unto the Lord thy God, even for all this remnant ; for we are left but a few of many, as thine 3 eyes do behold us : that the Lord thy God may shew us the way wherein we should walk, and the thing that we 4 should do. Then Jeremiah the prophet said unto them, I have heard you ; behold, I will pray unto the Lord your God according to your words ; and it shall come to pass that whatsoever thing the Lord shall answer you, I will declare it unto you; I will keep nothing back 5 from you. Then they said to Jeremiah, The Lord be a true and faithful witness ° amongst us, if we do not even according to all the word wherewith the Lord thy 6 God shall send thee to us. Whether it be good,, or * In ch. xliii. 2, Asariah. b Heb. fall. ° Or, against away after his murder and theh rescued. We may infer this with some confidence from the mode of reference here. Jezaniah the son of Hoshaiah. We should probably read, with the LXX, 'Azariah the son of Maaseiah:' cf. xliii. 2 and xl. 8. 2, 3. The Jews were quite sincere in their desire to learn what direction Yahweh had for them, and they did not doubt that Jeremiah really stood in the council of God. But they probably did not anticipate that the response would be what it was. Escape from territory under Chaldean government would have seemed to them so obvious a necessity that they would not look for more than instructions how this was to be secured. Notice 'Yahweh thy God' answered in 4 by 'Yahweh your God.' In 5, 6 we have first ' Yahweh thy God,' then ' Yahweh our God.' 4. Jeremiah hints in his reply that the answer may be unwel come. His own judgement of the situation was no doubt what he subsequently learned the Divine will to be ; and he knew that his petitioners had made up their minds in the contrary direction. Still, they protest that whatever be the response, evil no less than good, they will obey it (3, 6).. JEREMIAH 42. 7-1 1. B 193 whether it be evil, we will obey the voice of the Lord our God, to whom we send thee ; that it may be well with us, when we obey the voice of the Lord our God. And it came to pass after ten days, that the word of 7 the Lord came unto Jeremiah. Then called he Johanan 8 the son of Kareah, and all the captains of the forces which were with him, and all the people from the least even to the greatest, and said unto them, Thus saith the 9 Lord, the God of Israel, unto whom ye sent me to a pre sent your supplication before him : If ye will still abide 10 in this land, then will I build you, and not pull you down, and I will plant you, and not pluck you up : for I repent me of the evil that I have done unto you. Be not afraid n * Or, lay 1. This verse is very important for the insight it gives us into the nature of prophecy. Jeremiah does not confuse the Divine revelation with the desires of his heart or the conclusions of his judgement. Otherwise he would not have needed to wait for ten days. His waiting was not that his own mind might be made up, or to still the excitement among the people ; for to prolong the suspense, especially when every hour seemed precious, would have been fatal to such an endeavour ; nor yet in the_ hope that new circumstances might guide his decision. It was quite literally because he would not announce as a Divine revelation an answer which he did not definitely know to be such. It was an element in his prophetic gift that he could clearly and sharply distinguish between objective and subjective, between the word of God and the thought of his own heart. 9-22. In this answer Duhm, followed by Erbt, Cornill, and Rothstein, strikes out 15-18 as due to a supplementer. The kernel of the oracle he finds in 19-21 ; what belongs to it in 9-14 he regards as much worked over. IO. I repent me. To the modern reader this suggests that Yahweh regrets what He has done, and if He were again placed in the same situation would act differently. This, however, is not the meaning. It is no confession of mistake or remorse for the evil He has inflicted. But now that His righteous judgement has been executed, His attitude to His people is changed, and for the future He is prepared to build up those whom His justice has forced Him to pull down. 11. They not unnaturally feared that Nebuchadnezzar would II O 194 JEREMIAH 42. 12-18. BS of the king of Babylon, of whom ye are afraid ; be not afraid of him, saith the Lord : for I am with you to save 1 2 you, and to deliver you from his hand. And I will grant you mercy, that he may have mercy upon you, and cause 1 3 you to return to your own land. But if ye say, We will not dwell in this land ; so that ye obey not the voice of the 14 Lord your God ; saying, No ; but we will go into the land of Egypt, where we shall see no war, nor hear the sound of the trumpet, nor have hunger of bread ; and 15 there will we dwell: [S] now therefore hear ye the word pf the Lord, O remnant of Judah : thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, If ye wholly set your faces to 16 enter into Egypt, and go to sojourn there; then it shall come to pass, that the sword, which ye fear, shall overtake you there in, the land of Egypt, and the famine, whereof ye are afraid, a shall follow hard after you there in Egypt j 17 and there ye shall die. So shall it be with all the men that set their faces to go into Egypt to sojourn there ; they shall die by the sword, by the famine, and by the pesti lence : and none of them shall remain or escape from the !8 evil that I will bring upon them. For thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel ; As mine anger and my fury hath been poured forth upon the inhabitants' of a Heb. shall cleave after you. treat the murder of his representative as a new act of rebellion on the part, of the incorrigible Jews, and exact vengeance without too nice a discrimination between the guilty and the innocent. 12. to return to your own land. Since they were in.their own land at the time, we should no doubt point the text differ ently and read, with the Syriac and Vulgate, < to dwell in your own land.' 1*. The advantages of Egypt appeal to them as forcibly as they did to the Hebrews in the desert After the stress of the past and the terror of the present, an idyllic future seems to lie before them. If 'war ' has a definite reference,. it may be to a punitive expedition sent by Babylon or to an attack led by Ishmael. „ JEREMIAH 42. ig—43. 2. SB 195 Jerusalem, so shall my fury be poured forth upon you, when ye shall enter into Egypt: and ye shall be an execration, and an astonishment, and a curse, and a re proach; and ye shall see this place no more. [B] The 19 Lord hath spoken concerning you, O remnant of Judah, Go ye not into Egypt : know certainly that I have testified unto you this day. For ye have dealt deceitfully B against 20 your own souls; for ye sent me unto the Lord your God, saying, Pray for us unto the Lord our God ; and according unto all that, the Lord our God shall say, so declare unto us, and we will do it : and I have this day 2 1 declared it to you ; but ye have not obeyed the voice of the Lord your God in any thing for the which he hath sent me unto you. Now therefore know certainly that ye 22 shall die by the sword, by the famine, and by the pesti lence, in the place whither ye desire to go to sojourn there. And it came to pass that when Jeremiah had made an 43 end of speaking unto all the people all the words of the Lord their God, wherewith the Lord their God had sent him to them, even all these words, then spake 2 Azariah the son of Hoshaiah, and Johanan the son of 1 Or, in your souls 18. We should probably read ' This is the word of the Lord unto you ' (so Targum, Symmachus, and Vulgate). If 15-18 is a subsequent insertion, this verse is then the apodosis to 13, 14. We should also insert, with the LXX, 'Now therefore' before 'know.' No explicit statement of their intention to disobey seems to have been needed. Jeremiah saw it in their faces. 20. dealt deceitfully against. The Hebrew is rather dubious. It would be better, with the LXX, to read ' ye have done evil against.' They are responsible for the evil which will follow, since they took the initiative in requesting Divine direction and spontaneously promised to obey it. xliii. 1. The people heard Jeremiah to the end without inter ruption. O 2 196 JEREMIAH 43. 3-5. B Kareah, and all the proud men, saying unto Jeremiah, Thou speakest falsely : the Lord our God hath not sent thee to say, Ye shall not go into Egypt to sojourn there : 3 but Baruch the son of Neriah setteth thee on against us, for to deliver us into the hand of the Chaldeans, that they may put us to death, and carry us away captives 4 to Babylon. So Johanan jthe son of Kareah, and all the captains of the forces, and all the people, obeyed not the voice of the Lord, to dwell in the land of Judah. 5 But Johanan the son of Kareah, and all the captains 2. and all the proud men, saying. The Hebrew for ' saying' is against the idiom of the language and not the usual expression ; we should read ' defiant ' {hammortm for 'om'riwi), with Giese brecht and others. The LXX omits ' proud,' and is followed by Cornill and Rothstein. Thou speakest falsely. They do not, of course, mean to disobey Yahweh's word, but it runs so counter to their reason and their wishes that they will not believe that it is His word. Yet they do not venture to hint that Jeremiah has deliberately con cocted the message and palmed it off on the people as Yahweh's oracle. Baruch has got the old man under his influence, and played on his senility, so that he attributes to heaven-sent inspira tion what is due only to Baruch's sinister suggestion. Baruch had perhaps allowed his judgement on the flight into Egypt to become known. It is noteworthy that Jeremiah makes no answer. It would be precarious to argue that this was due to any doubt, which he had to solve through internal debate, and the solution of which was expressed in the scene at Tahpanhes recorded in 8-13. His certainty was not affected by the reception accorded to his message. 5. that . . . Judah. This is a strange expression, which would have been suitable to express a return from a world-wide disper sion, but not one from the neighbouring lands. The LXX reads simply ' that were returned to sojourn in the land.' This may well be the true reading, the Hebrew having arisen out of it through the almost mechanical addition by a heedless scribe of phraseology familiar in a different connexion. There is force in Cornill's remark that we do not expect in this verse a special category of the remnant, this comes in 6, but rather something which was characteristic of the whole remnant. Since in this passage 'sojourn ' is used only with reference to Egypt, he thinks some such clause as ' who had set their faces to sojourn in the land JEREMIAH 43. 6-8. B 197 of the forces, took all the remnant of Judah, that were returned from all the nations whither they had been driven to sojourn in the land of Judah ; the men, and 6 the women, and the children, and the king's daughters, and every person that Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard had left with Gedaliah the son of Ahikam, the son of Shaphan, and Jeremiah the prophet, and Baruch the son .of Neriah ; and they came into the land of 7 Egypt ; for they obeyed not the voice of the Lord : and they came even to Tahpanhes. Then came the word 8 of Egypt ' would answer all requirements, but confesses himself at a loss to understand how the present text can have arisen out of it. 6. It is not clear whether Jeremiah and Baruch were forcibly carried into Egypt, or voluntarily accompanied the refugees. The latter would not be inconsistent with the prophet's protest. His vocation lifted him above the common duty. Just as he advised others to desert to the Chaldeans, but felt his own place to be in the doomed city to the last ; so he may have counselled the remnant to remain in the land, but when they refused have felt it his duty to accompany them. 7. Tahpanhes : i. e. Daphne or Defenneh (ii. 16), a frontier city of Egypt, lying on the road out of Egypt to Palestine. xliii. 8-13. Jeremiah Predicts that Nebuchadnezzar will Conquer Egypt. Duhm regards this section as ' historically worthless Midrash,' but this judgement is not generally accepted. The passage presents real difficulties, but they are largely removed by textual criticism. As a frontier fortress Tahpanhes would quite naturally be taken by Nebuchadnezzar at an early stage of the invasion of Egypt. The narrative is probably from the pen of Baruch, but may have been touched by a later editor. It may be added that Erbt's discussion of the passage is especially suggestive, though it would be unwarrantable to suppose that the scene expressed any re-establishment of- the prophet's conviction as to the flight into Egypt which had been shaken by the accusation that Baruch, not Yahweh, was the source of it (see note on 2). xliii. 8-13. While Jeremiah was in Tahpanhes Yahweh bade him take great stones and bury them at the entry of Pharaoh's house, in the sight of the Jews, and tell them in His name that He 198 JEREMIAH 43. 9. B 9 of the Lord unto Jeremiah in Tahpanhes, saying, Take will bring His servant Nebuchadnezzar, who shall set his throne over the buried stones. He shall smite Egypt, and burn the temples of its gods, and treat the land of Egypt as a shepherd treats his garment, and break the obelisks of Beth-shemesh. xliii. 8. The revelation seems to have come to Jeremiah soon after the arrival at Tahpanhes. The company would probably have to halt there to receive permission to proceed. 9. The text is .probably corrupt. The words rendered ' and hide them in mortar in the brickwork ' have occasioned much difficulty ; Graf in fact found all the explanations offered so un satisfactory that he was tempted to think that the action was not really performed, a view taken by some scholars with reference to the symbolic actions recorded in Ezekiel. This, however, must not be accepted here. The LXX read a different text, • in the forecourt ; ' the other Greek Versions and the Vulgate a different text again. Moreover the two words in the Hebrew are suspici ously alike ; one of them occurs nowhere else, and the other Only in Neh. iii. 14 and possibly 2 Sam. xii. 31. Gillies thinks the scribe intended to write the second word, but by a slip wrote the first, and then without crossing it out wrote the word he had meant to write. ¦ More probably, however, We should strike out the second word as due to dittography of the first, and then emend the first word by omitting a consonant, reading 'in secret' for 'in mortar,' with the Vulgate and the Greek Versions other than the LXX. The clause would then run ' and hide them in secret at the entry,' &c. Probably, as Erbt and Cornill think, the incident occurred at night. This is not negatived by the clause 'in sight of the men of Judah,' for in Ezek. xii. 1-16 we have a similar sign enacted by night in the sight of ' the rebellious house : ' cf. especially ' I brought it forth in the dark, and bare it upon my shoulder in their sight ' (Ezek. xii. 7, cf. 6). It is before a company of Jews and not the whole population of the city that the mysterious sign is enacted. The aged prophet painfully carries large stones to the entrance of Pharaoh's house and, as the wondering Jews look on, buries them before it. The uncanny scene enacted under cover of the night soon receives its explanation. The JeWs have come to Egypt to escape from Nebuchadnezzar. But trie king's long arm will at length reach them there. He will invade Egypt and above these very stones will erect his throne. The act of the prophet is no mere sign. Just as the prophetic word, once uttered, moves forward to effect its own fulfilment, so the prophetic deed is not simply a prediction, it sets in motion the train of events which is to lead up to its realization. To an audience familiar with this almost magical efficacy of prophets' words and acts, an JEREMIAH 43. 10-12. B 199 great stones in thine hand, and ahide them in mortar in the brickwork, which is at the entry of Pharaoh's house in Tahpanhes, in the sight of the men of Judah ; and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the 10 God of Israel : Behold, I will send and take Nebucha drezzar the king of Babylon, my servant, and will set his throne upon these stones that I have hid ; and he shall spread his b royal pavilion over them. And he shall 1 r come, and shall smite the land of Egypt ; such as are for death shall be given to death, and such as are for captivity to captivity, and such as are for the sword to the sword. And I will kindle a fire in the houses of 1 2 * Or, lay them with mortar in the pavement (or square) b tOr, glittering act of this kind must have appealed with a force we can hardly imagine. They would feel themselves to be present when new forces were being released ; they stood at the fountain-head of a new current in history. at the entry of Pharaoh's house. This is generally regarded as a royal palace, and the question has been raised whether Jere miah could have ventured on this action. More probably ' if was not a palace in the strict sense of the term, but a house used for the royal residence if the king happened to visit Tahpanhes, as in view of its military importance he would do at times. And the stones would not be buried within the residence itself but in front of it. The scene of the prophet's operations may have been the brick pavement by the fort excavated by Prof. Petrie in 1886. But if we omit ' in the brickwork ' one ground for the identification disappears, and it is not probable that the prophet would have to remove part of a pavement before he buried the stones. IO. and will set : LXX and Syriac better, ' he shall set.' xoyal pavilion. The Hebrew word occurs only here. The root may mean ' beautiful,' 'brilliant.' The word must express here something appertaining to the king's royal state, it may mean the pavilion or perhaps the carpet on which his throne was placed. The order of the clauses rather favours the view that the pavilion is meant, since the spreading of the carpet would precede the placing of the throne. 11. Cf. xv. 2. 12. I will kindle: read, with LXX, Syr., and Vulg., 'he will kindle.' 200 JEREMIAH 43. 13. B the gods of Egypt ; and he shall burn them, and carry them away captives : and he shall array himself with the land of Egypt, as a shepherd putteth on his garment ; 13 and he shall go forth from thence in peace. He shall also break the a pillars of b Beth-shemesh, that is in the * fOr, obelisks h Or, The house of the sun Probably, Heliopolis or On. he shall array . . . garment. This is a difficult clause, and very variously interpreted. The word rendered ' array himself ' means usually ' to wrap oneself,' and many abide by this sense here. The point, however, is by no means clear. The best repre sentatives of this view take it to be the ease with which the king of Babylon will possess himself of the land ofEgypt. But the idea of clothing oneself in a country is very strange, and the point of the comparison ought to have been clearly expressed. Hitzigand Duhm think the meaning is that just as a shepherd reverses his mantle, wearing now the inside of the fleece and now the outside next the skin, according as the weather is cold or hot, so the king of Babylon will reverse things in Egypt, turn them upside down. This sense, however, is very dubious. Others prefer the rend ering ' roll up ; ' the point is then that the conqueror takes up Egypt and its possessions as easily as the shepherd rolls up his mantle with all it contains and carries it with him. The LXX has a peculiar rendering to the effect that Nebuchadnezzar will treat Egypt as a shepherd cleanses his vermin-infested garment, picking off the objectionable inmates one by one. He can do this deliberately and thoroughly, since he has plenty of leisure. The metaphor is not one which would commend itself to the taste of the present day, but in itself it is vigorous and effective, expressing Jeremiah's contempt for the Egyptians and his recognition of Nebuchadnezzar's military power. This rendering is accepted by Cornill, von Gall, and Rothstein. 13. This verse is regarded by some as an addition, since after Nebuchadnezzar is said in 12 to leave Egypt in peace, it is out of place to return to his destruction of the obelisks and temples. Rothstein escapes this objection by inserting 13" after ia% and striking out 13* as a repetition of iaa. the pillars ... Egypt. If the text is correct, Beth-shemesh 15 probably a proper name, to be identified, as the margin says, with Heliopolis or On. The clause ' that is in the laud of Egypt,' is probably a gloss intended to distinguish the place mentioned from the Beth-shemesh in Palestine, a distinction quite needless for the writer to have made. The LXX has ' that is in On,' so probably did not take Beth-shemesh as a proper name, but under- JEREMIAH 44. r. BBS 201 land of Egypt ; and the houses of the gods of Egypt shall he burn with fire. [BS] The word that came to Jeremiah concerning all 44 stood the whole clause to mean ' the temple of the sun which is in On.' Heliopolis was a city about six miles north-east of Cairo. It was famous for its temple of the sun, and the avenue of obelisks in front of it. ' Cleopatra's Needle ' was one of these obelisks ; of the rest one only remains in its place. Others are in Rome, Constantinople, and Paris. The question whether Nebuchadnezzar actually invaded Egypt has been much discussed, but a fragmentary inscription of his shows that in 568 b. c. such an invasion did take place, in which the Egyptian king Amasis was defeated. At that time Jeremiah is hardly likely to have been still alive. xliv. Jeremiah Testifies against the Worship of the Queen of Heaven. This section, painful though it is to see the rebellious temper which animated the people to the last, is of great historical interest. The effect of the disasters which had come so thickly upon the people was not unnaturally that many felt themselves dispensed from the service of a God who could not or would not help them. In a most instructive passage in Ezekiel we read of those who, while the city and Temple were still standing, practised a degraded form of idolatry, saying ' Yahweh seeth us not ; Yahweh hath forsaken the land' (Ezek. viii. 12). Similarly the refugees in Egypt argued quite plausibly, it is only since the finding of the Book of the Law and the introduction of new-fangled ideas and suppression of older forms of worship that misfortunes have over whelmed us. The practical inference they drew was that they would do well to resume the cults they had abandoned, and enjoy the prosperity which had been their lot in those days of religious breadth and material prosperity. The present chapter is based on Baruch's memoirs, but it has received not a little expansion. It is noteworthy that no information is given us at the outset as to the occasion, and that we have to infer the situation from what is told us in the latter part of the chapter. The address of Jeremiah (2-14) is largely made up of phraseology such as is elsewhere familiar to us in the book. But even in this we may recognize that the drift of the prophet's argument is correctly reproduced. xliv. 1-10. Jeremiah spoke to the Jews in Egypt as follows : You have seen how Yahweh has made Jerusalem and Judah desolate for the idolatry they practised, though He sent His 202 JEREMIAH 44. i. BS the Jews which dwelt in the land of Egypt, which dwelt prophets to warn them. Why then are you doing evil by prac tising idolatry in Egypt, to bring utter ruin on yourselves ? Have you forgotten the sin of your fathers and your own sin ? 11-14. Therefore Yahweh will cut off the remnant of Judah that is in Egypt, so that none shall return but fugitives. 15-19. Then the assembly replied that they would not hearken ; but they would perform their vow to worship the Queen of Heaven, as they had done in Judah, for then all was well with them. But since they had abandoned her worship, disaster had been their portion. And the : worship offered by the women had been with the consent of their husbands. 20-28. Jeremiah replied, Yahweh took note of your idolatrous worship, till He could bear it no longer, hence the desolation of your land and the evil you are suffering. So since you hold fast your vows to worship the Queen of Heaven, do so ; but know that Yahweh will slay all the Jews in Egypt, so that only very few shall return to the land of Judah. Then it will be known whose word shall stand. 29-30. And the sign shall be that Pharaoh Hqphra shall be given into the power of his foes. xliv. 1. The place where the incident occurred is not named, but only the localities from which the assembly was drawn. The clause mentioning these is struck out by several as probably a later insertion, and the presence of Jews from Pathros, i. e. Upper Egypt, asserted in 15 (see note), is surprising. As we know from the recently discovered Aramaic papyri, there was a colony of Jews in Pathros, and some of these may have been present. Moreover xxiv. 8 justifies the view that even before the fall of Jerusalem there was a body of Jews in Egypt. It is possible that some of these had come to Tahpanhes to meet the fugitives. But the impression made by the narrative is rather that some time had elapsed since their arrival. Not all at once is the reversion to heathenism likely to have been accomplished. True, the people had acted in defiance of Jeremiah's exhortations ; yet this had not been in their minds rebellion against Yahweh, but a refusal to recognize the prophet as His spokesman. The stage they had now reached did not involve a formal renunciation of Yahweh, but a recognition of other deities as legitimate objects of worship. But after the Deuteronomic Reformation it was a distinct repudiation of the principles on which it had rested. It was thus a reversion to the pre-Reformation standpoint, but it was a sin against light to a greater degree than the idolatry of the earlier period. In fairness, however, it must be admitted that from the popular stand- point not a little was to be said for the view that the Reformation had proved a disaster. JEREMIAH 44. a-?. BS 203 at Migdol, and at Tahpanhes, and at Noph, and in the country of Pathros, saying, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, 2 the God of Israel : Ye have seen all the evil that I have brought upon Jerusalem, and upon all the cities of Judah ; and, behold, this day they are a desolation, and no man dwelleth therein ; because of their wickedness which 3 they have committed to provoke me to anger, in that they went to burn incense, and to serve other gods, whom they knew not, neither they, nor ye,, nor your fathers. Howbeit I sent unto you all my servants the 4 prophets, rising up early and sending them, saying, Oh, do not this abominable thing that I hate. But they 5 hearkened not, nor inclined their ear to turn from their wickedness, to burn no incense unto other gods. Where- 6 fore my fury and mine anger was poured forth, and was kindled in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem ; and they are wasted and desolate, as it is this day. Therefore now thus saith the Lord, the God 1 Migdol was another frontier town a little to the east of Tahpanhes, now known as Tell es-Sernut. It lay on the high road from Asia into Egypt, and is to be distinguished from the Migdol of Exod. xiv. 2. For Noph see on ii. 16. Pathros is Upper Egypt. The Egyptian name Pa-to-ris means ' Land of the South.' 2. The occasion of the address is not defined, as no doubt it would be in Baruch's memoirs, but apparently it was some religious festival at which Jews of the neighbouring localities had come together ; the people began their preparations for the worship of the Queen of Heaven (vii. 18), and thus called forth the prophet's denunciation. The prophet's address has probably been a good deal edited, but no satisfactory construction of the original is now possible. 3-5. The fluctuation between the second and third person may be due partly to textual corruption, partly to expansion. burn incense: better 'to offer sacrifice' (see note on i. 16), and so throughout the chapter. For the latter part of the verse cf. xix. 4. 4. Cf. vii. 25, xxv. 4, &c. 6. Cf. vii. 20, xxxiii. 10, xiii. 18. 7. against your own souls : cf. xxvi. 19. 204 JEREMIAH 44. 8-14. BS of hosts, the God of Israel : Wherefore commit ye this great evil against your own souls, to cut off from you man and woman, infant and suckling, out of the midst 8 of Judah, to leave you none remaining, ; in that ye pro voke me unto anger with the works of your hands, burning incense unto other gods in the land of Egypt, whither ye be gone to sojourn ; that ye may be cut off, and that ye may be a curse and a reproach among all 9 the nations of the earth ? Have ye forgotten the wicked ness of your fathers, and the wickedness of the kings of Judah, and the wickedness of their wives, and your own wickedness, and the wickedness of your wives, which they committed in the land of Judah, and in the streets 10 of Jerusalem? They are not humbled even unto this day, neither have they feared, nor walked in my law, nor in my statutes, that I set before you and before your u fathers. Therefore thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel : Behold, I will set my face against you 12 for evil, even to cut off all Judah. And I will take the remnant of Judah, that have set their faces to go into the land of Egypt to sojourn there, and they shall all be consumed ; in the land of Egypt shall they fall ; they shall be consumed by the sword and by the famine; they shall die, from the least even unto the greatest, by the sword and by the famine : and they shall be an execration, and an astonishment, and a curse, and a 13 reproach. For I will punish them that dwell in the land of Egypt, as I have punished Jerusalem, by the sword, 14 by the famine,. and by the pestilence: so that none of the remnant of Judah, which are gone into the land of Egypt to sojourn there, shall escape or remain, that 9. their wives: read, with LXX, 'their princes.,1 JEREMIAH 44. 15-18. BS B 205 they should return into the land of Judah, to the which they "have a desire to return to dwell there : for none shall return save such as shall escape. [B] Then, all the men which knew that their wives 15 burned incense unto other gods, and all the women that stood by, a great assembly, even all the people that dwelt in the land of Egypt, in Pathros, answered Jere miah, saying, As for the word that thou hast spoken unto 16 us in the name of the Lord, we will not hearken unto thee. But we will certainly perform every word that is 17 gone forth out of our mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we and our fathers, our kings and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem : for then had we plenty of b victuals, and were well, and saw no evil. But since we left off to burn 18 * Heb. lift up their soul. b Heb. bread. 12. Cf. xiii. 18. 15. a great assembly : Duhm reads ' with a loud voice' {qol for qdhdl). in Pathros : see on 1. We should read ' and in Pathros,' with the Syriac, explaining Egypt as Lower Egypt ; but regard the whole clause 'even . . . Pathros' as an insertion, since it is very unlikely that Jews, especially women, had come from Upper Egypt. 17. the queen of heaven : i. e. Ishtar; see note on vii. 18. 18. since we left off: i. e. apparently at the time of the Re formation, though some think the worship of Ishtar had been resumed in the reign of Jehoiakim ; see on this question vol. i, p. 150. The misfortunes that had fallen upon them in quick succession : the untimely death of Josiah ; the Egyptian suzer ainty and deportation of Jehoahaz to Egypt; the captivity of Jehoiachin and the flower of the nation ; the horrors of the second siege; the capture and destruction of Jerusalem; the blinding of the king and execution of so many of the princes; the captivity to Babylon ; the murder of Gedaliah and the flight into Egypt ; all the long tragic catalogue they naturally from their standpoint attributed to the wrath of the neglected Queen of Heaven. 206 JEREMIAH 44. 19-22. BS incense to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, we have wanted all things, and have 19 been consumed by the sword and by the famine. And when we burned incense to the queen of heaven, and poured out drink offerings unto her, did we make her cakes to a worship her, and pour out drink offerings unto 20 her, without our husbands ? [S] Then Jeremiah said unto all the people, to the men, and to the women, even to all the people which had given him that answer, saying, 21 The incense that ye burned in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem, ye and your fathers, your kings and your princes, and the people of the land, did not the Lord remember them, and came it not into his mind? 23 so that the Lord could no longer bear, because of the evil of your doings, and because of the abominations * fOr, pourtray 19. From the close of the verse it is clear that the womenare speaking, but the Hebrew text of 15 treats the whole speech 16- 19 as spoken by the men and the women. The Syriac inserts at the beginning of this verse ' And all the women answered and said.' Whether we should read this, making of course, the con sequential change of masculine into feminine in the Hebrew ; or whether we should strike out the reference to the men in 15 and so make the whole of 16-19 an address of the women, changing the masculines into feminines throughout, is uncertain ; the latter course is perhaps preferable. to worship her : better, as in margin, ' to pourtray her ; ' see vol. i, p. 151. without our husbands: According to the law of vows, Num. xxx. 4-17, women needed their husbands' consent before their vows were valid. The law in its present written form is late, but it probably, like so much in the late legislation, embodies ancient practice. The point is that they have fulfilled the condi tions requisite for a vow. If Jeremiah complains, the implication may be, let him settle the matter with the husbands. 20-23 is regarded as secondary by Duhm, who is followed by several scholars. The original answer he finds in 24 ff., the present passage simply reproducing the contents of a-14. 21. The incense: better ' The sacrifice.' JEREMIAH 44. 23-25. SB 207 which ye have committed ; therefore is your land become a desolation, and an astonishment, and a curse, without inhabitant, as it is this day. Because ye have burned 23 incense, and because ye have sinned against the Lord, and have not obeyed the voice of the Lord, nor walked in his law, nor in his statutes, nor in his testimonies ; therefore this evil is happened unto you, as it is this day. [B] Moreover Jeremiah said unto all the people, and 24 to all the women, Hear the word of the Lord, all Judah that are in the land of Egypt: thus saith the Lord of 25 hosts, the God of Israel, saying : Ye and your wives have both spoken with your mouths, and with your hands have fulfilled it, saying, We will surely perform our vows that we have vowed, to burn incense to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her : establish then 24. all Judah . . . Egypt : omitted by LXX, probably rightly. 25. Ye and your wives : read with LXX, ' Ye women.' The Hebrew shows that the women are addressed. Ironically he bids them perform their idolatrous vows. We should perhaps read ' establish your words.' 26-28. In its present form the text implies that Yahweh's name will not be used in Egypt by any Jew (26), since all the Jews in Egypt will be completely destroyed (27) ; a few will escape into Judah, and the Jewish remnant that has come into Egypt shall know whose word shall stand (28). The representa tion does not hang well together ; we have the definite statement of complete extermination modified by the prediction that some will return to Judah, and the wording of 28b most naturally suggests that the Jews who are in Egypt will know whose word stands, though this remnant has disappeared. We have a similar contradiction in 14. Duhm thinks that in its original form Jere miah continued his ironical address : ' And let Yahweh's name be no more spoken in the oath, As Yahweh liveth,' meaning let them abandon the worship of Yahweh altogether. Similarly Erbt and Cornill. This was changed into the prediction in the present text ; 27 was added in explanation. 28s was added by the hand to which we owe i4b, but 28* is substantially from the memoirs giving the close of Jeremiah's address. 2 208 JEREMIAH 44. a6-3o. BBS 6 your vows, and perform your vows. [BS] Therefore hear ye the word of the Lord, all Judah that dwell in the land of Egypt : Behold, I have sworn by my great name, saith the Lord, that my name shall no more be named in the mouth of any man of Judah in all the land 27 of Egypt, saying, As the Lord God liveth. Behold, I watch over them for evil, and not for good : and all the men of Judah that are in the land of Egypt shall be consumed by the sword and by the famine, until there 28 be an end of them. And they that escape the sword shall return out of the land of Egypt into the land of Judah, few in number ; and all the remnant of Judah, that are gone into the land of Egypt to sojotirn there, shall know 29 whose word shall stand, mine, or theirs. And this shall be the sign unto you, saith the Lord, that I will punish you in this place, that ye may know that my words shall 3o surely stand against you for evil : thus saith the Lord : Behold, I will give Pharaoh Hophra king of Egypt into the hand of his enemies, and into the hand of them that seek his life ; as I gave Zedekiah king of Judah into the hand of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, his enemy, and that sought his life. 29, 30. According to the statement of Herodotus (ii. 161-163, 169), Hophra or, as Herodotus calls him, Apries, in consequence of an unsuccessful expedition against Cyrene, was dethroned by Amasis, who although desirous of sparing him, had to give him up to the people, who strangled him. This narrative is accepted by many scholars, but rejected by Wiedemann, who is followed by Cornill. If the story is correct, the present prophecy in its apparent distinction of the enemies of Hophra from Nebuchad nezzar agrees with history, so closely in fact that several regard it as either composed or brought into its present form after the event. The reign of Hophra ended about 570 B. c. In 568, when Nebu chadnezzar invaded Egypt, Amasis was on the throne. Hophra's death took place in 564. JEREMIAH 45. i. B 209 [B] The word that Jeremiah the prophet spake unto 45 xiv. Rebuke and Promise Addressed to Baruch. According to the title this oracle dates from the fourth year of Jehoiakim, when the prophet's secretary wrote the roll. Its authenticity was doubted by Reuss and Schwally, but it has been accepted by all recent expositors. Its apparently insignificant, character is enough to refute the theory that it is a work of imagination. But several writers do not accept the fourth year of Jehoiakim as the date of its origin. It contemplates a life of exile for Baruch as impending or already begun. Trouble upon trouble had already been his portion. In the fourth year of Jehoiakim the prophet rather contemplated the possibility that his people might repent and exile be averted. Its position in the book is also thought to indicate a later origin. Duhm says its proper place would have been after xxxvi. 4, but it is npt probable that xxxvi included anything of the kind. These arguments, however, are by no means decisive. It is true that Jeremiah wrote the roll in the hope that his people might repent, but though it was his duty to hope against hope and labour to the* last, he was under no illusion as to the likelihood of repentance. He expected the worst. And the contents of the roll were such as to fill Baruch with the liveliest sorrow for the doom that was hanging over the nation ; it was com posed entirely of oracles of denunciation and disaster, such as ought to have caused its hearers to rend their clothes, and which aptualiy roused the king to a fury that would have been fatal not simply to the roll itself, but to author and scribe. And a personal prophecy of this kind would have been quite out of place in xxxvi. It would have ruined the progress of the narrative by introducing- an irrelevant element, when all attention was to be concentrated on the effect produced by the roll. Its position at the close of Baruch's memoirs is to be explained by the author's modesty rather than by chronological considerations. These arguments, then, do not negative the evidence of the title. It must be owned, however, that the title itself presents difficulties. The clause .'when he wrote these words ' should refer to a prophecy or narrative which immediately precedes ; hence it might be argued that xiv really succeeded xliv in point of time, since we may not unreasonably suppose that its position at the end of the memoirs was duetto Baruch himself. But this simply means that the data of the title are conflicting, and it is much less violent to read ' the words ' than to strike out the date. SO far as the .contents of the chapter are concerned they might suit a later date, whether in the closing years of Zedekiah, as Kdberle thinks, or after the destruction of Jerusalem, as Giesebrecht, Duhm, Erbt, and Gillies suppose. Cornill, who has written by far the most penetrating and sugges- II ? 2io JEREMIAH 45. i. B Baruch the. son of Neriah, when he wrote these words in a book at the mouth of Jeremiah, in the fourth year live study* of the chapter, holds fast to the date in the title, and thinks that only thus does the real significance of the oracle get its true appreciation. He sets aside as unworthy the interpretation that Baruch was complaining over his personal troubles and the uncertainty of earning a livelihood. Rather it is the writing of the roll which has filled him with pain. Is there then no hope for anything better ? Will Yahweh not repent once more of the evil He thinks of doing to His people? Truly a great thing to ask, but then is not Yahweh He who does great things ? It was no ignoble feeling which prompted his complaint, but love to his people and belief in God's mercy. But he failed to see that while it was possible for love and mercy to aehieve their end, God would not have denied them scope. For He was the Creator, it was He who had planted, He who had built up. Certainly He did not destroy His own work wantonly or with indifference, but only with pain ; if He brings Himself to do it, then no alternative remains to be tried. Man can do nothing but be silent in the presence of so reluctant a resolve. The disaster which is threatened cannot be averted from the guilty people, but Baruch's own life should be spared. With full'sympathy' Jeremiah entered into the feelings of his disciple ; he too had gone through the same experience, and . had schooled himself into acceptance of the will of God. Cornill brings out strongly the immense significance of the thought, here for the first time expressed, that the Creator, just because He is the Creator, must be filled with love for His creation. Here it is applied simply to Judah ; in Job x. 8 ff. it is extended to the individual man ; in Jonah iv. n it is expressed in all its greatness and splendour. The interpretation given by Cornill yields a worthy sense, and the present writer can do no other than accept it in the main. He questions, however, whether the language, and especiallythe exhortation not to seek great things for him^ self, does not imply an element of personal self-seeking which Cornill does not recognize. While he also agrees that the date in the title is to be preferred, he thinks that the oracle might still bear the same deep meaning if it dated from a later period in Baruch's career. xiv. 1-5. The word spoken to Baruch when he wrote the roll. Thou hast said, Sorrow is added to my pain, and I find no rest. I am breaking down what I have built, and plucking up what I have planted. And seek ho great thing for thyself: I am bringing evil on all flesh, biit thy life shall be preserved. xiv. 1. The title creates difficulties which have been touched upon in the Introduction to the section. 'These words' do not JEREMIAH 45. 2-5. B 211 of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah, saying, Thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel a unto thee, 3 O Baruch : Thou didst say, Woe is me now ! for the 3 Lord hath added sorrow to my pain ; b I am weary with my groaning, and I find no rest. Thus shalt thou 4 say unto him, Thus saith the Lord : Behold, that which I have built will I break down, and that which I have planted I will pluck up; and this in the whole land. And seekest thou great things for thyself? seek them not : 5 * +Or, concerning b See Ps. vi. 6. suit the memoirs, for Baruch did not write these at the dictation of Jeremiah, nor yet the roll written in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, for that roll was destroyed. Cornill thinks Baruch may have said, 'when I wrote the words of Jeremiah.' 3. Baruch's thoughts are cast in a poetical form; we may suppose that he had expressed them in writing and that Jeremiah had seen his composition. To pain for the fate which hung over his people was added anxiety as to his own lot. 4. Thus . . , him. These words do not harmonize with the pre ceding, in which Baruch himself, not Jeremiah, is addressed. The simplest expedient is to omit them. The significance of Yahweh's words is explained in the Intro duction to the chapter. If He destroy His own work it can only be with pain and reluctance, and because no alternative is open to Him. If Baruch is oppressed with sorrow, what must be Yahweh's pain ?and this in the whole land. These words are absent in the LXX, and the Hebrew is strange. Probably they are a gloss, intended to explain what it was that Yahweh was destroying. For ' land ' it would be better to render ' earth.' 5. It is difficult to avoid the impression that Baruch is here warned against undue personal claims, and in this respect Cornill's otherwise penetrating interpretation seems scarcely to do justice to the terms of the passage. But some of the suggestions made as to the form his claims took are wide of the mark. There is no hint that he expected to play a great part in the affairs of state, or to become a prophet. His desires were rather quite moderate ; but in such a time the most ordinary desires may be excessive. He must be satisfied to escape with bare life and a wandering- existence. It is noteworthy that in His word to Baruch, Yahweh displays the same sternness, the same exacting demand, the same lack of sym pathy and appreciation as to Jeremiah. We may say that what V 2 212 JEREMIAH 45. s— 46. i. BB for, behold, I will bring evil upon all flesh, saith the Lord : but thy life will I give unto thee for a prey in all places whither thou goest. 48 [B] The word' of the Lord which came to Jeremiah the prophet concerning the nations. Baruch achieved by giving to the world his memoirs of Jeremiah was a far greater thing than his most soaring ambition had ever contemplated. Erbt has a very ingenious theory as to the origin of the section. He thinks that it was written after Baruch had finished writing the memoirs of Jeremiah, and that after so much pain, Yahweh still prepares new woes, a Babylonian conquest for the remnant in Egypt. The prophet's days are wellnigh done, but a future still lies before Baruch, not of rest but of toil and con stant movement. Separation from his beloved master is impending ; for Jeremiah is sending him to Babylon, there to continue his work among the exiles. To Babylon he went and published the story of his master's work. He heard no^more of the prophet, hence we learn nothing of the end of his career. This theory, however, does not give any adequate meaning to the Divine reply to his complaint. xlvi-li. Oracles Against Foreign Nations. The prophecies contained in these chapters have in recent years been wholly or largely denied to Jeremiah. The most thorough attack on their authenticity was made by Schwally in Stade's Zeitschrift for 1888. The same conclusion has- been reached by Stade, Wellhausen, and Duhm. Other scholars have recognized interpolation, more or less extensive, while contending for a gen uine Jeremianic nucleus. A very general agreement has been reached, especially since Budde's discussion in the Jahrbiicher fur deutsche Theologie, 1878, that the Oracle against Babylon (1. 1— li. 58) is not authentic, though Orelli dissents from this, and Rothstein considers that even it may contain some Jeremianic matter. As to xlvi-xhx opinion is greatly divided. Even A. B. Davidson and Koberle consider that the chapters contain a considerable non- Jeremianic element, and critics like Kuenen, Giesebrecht, and i-rbt naturally adopt, though with considerable difference in detail, a very similar position. Among recent writers Cornill has the merit of giving the most searching discussion. He claims for Jeremiah a much larger proportion than Giesebrecht does. The question has to be settled for each oracle, but certain general objections to the prophecies considered as a whole call for exam ination at this point. JEREMIAH 46. a. B 213 Of Egypt : concerning the army of Pharaoh-neco king a of Egypt, which was by the river Euphrates in Carchemish, The objection that Jeremiah was not a prophet to the nations has been already discussed (vol. i, pp. 77, 78), and need not detain us. Assuming that, like the older prophets (xxviii, 8), he too was commissioned to speak 'against many countries and against great kingdoms,' we naturally anticipate that such prophecies may be found in the book. We cannot eliminate them on the baseless assumption that Jeremiah was conscious of no mission save to Ms own people. What then are the positive arguments in disproof of authenticity ? Schwally complains that the conception of God is quite other than Jeremiah's ; in these chapters He appears through - out as the vengeful Deity, who has dedicated the heathen to unalterable destruction. But the idea of Divine vengeance is not strange to Jeremiah (cf, v. 9, 29) •; and apart from this it is not really present in these prophecies except in xlvi. 10 ; though the idea of Divine judgement is, of course, present, and in accordance with the belief that Yahweh stands behind the events of history, the calamities that fall on the nations are assigned to His causation. When Schwally adds that there is no preaching of repentance, apart from which prophecy is unthinkable, we remember Habak- kuk and Nahum, and ask what Hebrew prophet ever felt himself called to preach repentance to the heathen ? Only in the very late Book of Jonah is there the suggestion of such an idea ; but Jonah is a representative of Israel as the Servant of Yahweh entrusted with' a mission to the Gentile world. The absence of explicit reference to affairs in Judah, which is another objection, would be amazing if the prophet had not dealt with them over and over again ; as it is, such an objection is unmeaning. Nor is it the case that what lies behind the prophecies is simply the antithesis between the people of God and the heathen as such, which was the creation of the exile ; or that the author knows nothing of the concrete relations of the peoples. The literary dependence^ of the prophecies in their present form on post-Jeremianic writings is not to be denied. But this and all the other arguments taken to gether prove nothing more than that the prophecies are not wholly authentic. They do not forbid us to recognize a substantial Jeremianic nucleus, which has undergone expansion at the hand of later editors. The question whether such an authentic nucleus can be discovered, and, if so, what limits should be set to it, can be answered only through a detailed investigation of the oracles themselves. On their original position in the Book of Jeremiah see the Introduction to xxv. The order of the prophecies differs in the Hebrew and Lthe LXX. It is now generally agreed that the former should be preferred. 2r4 JEREMIAH 46. 2. R which Nebuchadrezzar king Of Babylon smote in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah. xlvi. The Overthrow of Egypt. This; chapter contains two main divisions : (a) 2-12, (b) 13-28. The fofmer is dated in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, and its occasion is said to be the defeat of the army of Nebuchadnezzar at Carchemish. (On this epoch-making event and its consequences, see vol. i, pp. 18-20.) A prophecy on Egypt, at such a juncture, is what would naturally be expected. Egypt was Judah's suzerain ; Babylon the long-announced foe out of the north. In this year the prophet was commissioned to give the nations the cup of Yahweh's fury to drink, and the first of the heathen powers to drink was Egypt (xxv. 15-19)1 The objections to the authenticity are partly aesthetic ; the movement of the piece is not straight forward, but we pass to and fro between the preparation for the fight an^ its issue. Cornill, on the contrary, considers the descrip tion, when restored to its original form, most effective. Literary dependence on post-Jeremianic passages cannot be proved, it May in each case lie on the other side. Nor are the ideas such as are inconsistent with Jeremiah's authorship. Giesebrecht rather grudgingly grants that there may be a genuine nucleus, ' of which remains may be preserved e(g, in verses 7, 8, 5, 6.' But he seems more inclined to regard the whole as an early post^exilic com position. We should probably, however, regard the whole, as substantially genuine. The second oracle, 13-28, is decisively rejected by Giesebrecht on grounds which Cornill regards as so slight that he does not even name them. The same repetition and absence of clear development of the theme, the looseness of the connexion, the absurdity of the metaphor in 18, the impossibility of attributing 26 to Jeremiah, are the main points enumerated by Giesebrecht. Largely they are objections which can be rightly estimated only in a detailed study of the passage. Its date, assuming it to be substantially authentic, is uncertain. It is quite possible that it belongs to the same period as 3-12. But it may date from Jere miah's residence in Egypt, when he anticipated an invasion by Nebuchadnezzar (xliii. 8-13). This date would be certain if, as Cornill asserts, 17 contained a word-play on the name Hophra (see note). xlvi. 1. Title to the Oracles concerning the Nations. 2. Concerning the army of Pharaoh smitten at Carchemish by Nebuchadnezzar. 3-6. Let the soldiers make ready for the battle. Why do they turn back ? They are smitten and flee in terror. They have fallen by the Euphrates, JEREMIAH 46.3,4. J 2 '5 [J] Order ye the buckler and shield, and draw near to 3 battle. Harness the horses, and get up, ye horsemen, 4 S-12. Who rises up like the Nile ? It is Egypt, boasting that it cover the earth. Horses, chariots, warriors, tribes go forth to battle. But it is Yahweh's day of vengeance ; there is no healing for Egypt's wound. The earth is full of Egypt's cry for its fall. 13. Title of an Oracle on Nebuchadnezzar's conquest of Egypt. 14-19. Let Egypt prepare forthe conflict. Yahweh has" over thrown the strong one. The strangers exhort each other to escape to their own country. Call the name of Pharaoh a Crash. One comes eminent as Tabor among the mountains. Let the Egyptians prepare for exile. 20-26. Egypt is a fair heifer, stung by a gadfly ; her warriors are like well-fed cowardly calves, they have fled before the efifcrny. Egypt is like a serpent in the wood before an army of wood cutters. Her dense forest shall be cut down, since it cannot be searched out. Egypt is conquered by the northern people. It will be delivered into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, but shall ultimately be restored as of old. 27, 28. Fear not, Jacob, Servant of Yahweh, for thou shalt be restored and rest in thy land. I will utterly destroy the nations of thy dispersion, but thee I will only chastise. xlvi. 1. A title to the whole group of oracles. 2. The only part of the verse which belongs to the original oracle is the first words, which are better rendered ' On Egypt ; ' similarly in the titles to some of the other oracles. The rest of the verse is a note of great historical value, since it alone gives us independent information as to the site of the battle. On Pharaoh Necho see vol. i, pp. 15-19. His reign lasted 610-594 b. c. Carchemish is not Circesium (which lies at the junction of the Chaboras and the Euphrates), with which it used to be identified ; but Gargamish, as the Assyrian inscriptions call it, now known as Dschirbas (other spellings are Dscherabls, Jerabis, Jirbas, Girbas). It lies on the right bank of the Euphrates, north of Circesium and a little to the north of the junction of the Sagur with the Euphrates. It had been famous as the capital of the Hittites. Nebuchadnezzar was crown prince at the time, but succeeded his father Nabopo- lassar a little later. 3. The poet, without any preliminary description, plunges us into the heart of the situation. It is the eve of battle, and he bids the warriors make ready for the fray. ' The buckler ' is the small rounded shield, the ' shield ' is the long shield which protected the whole body. , 4. get up, ye horsemen. This is the traditional rendering, but 216 JEREMIAH 46. 5-8. J and stand forth with your helmets ; furbish the spears, 5 put on the coats of mail. Wherefore have I seen it ? they are dismayed and are turned backward ; and their mighty ones are beaten down, and, are fled apace, and loolc not back ; terror is on every sid§, saith the Lord. 6 Let not the swift flee away, "nor the mighty man escape ; in the, north by the river, Euphrates have they stumbled 1 and fallen. a'Who is this that riseth up like the Nile, 8 whose waters toss themselves like the rivers? Egypt riseth up like1 the Nile, and his waters toss themselves like the riyers : and he saijh, I will rise up, I will cover ¦ "¦ Or, Who is- this like the Nile that riseth' up, like the rivers whose waters toss .themselves ? Egypt is like the Nile that riseth up &c. : most recent commentators render ' mount the steeds.' '¦¦ The com mand ' furbish the spears ' comes in strangely as a direction on the eve of an engagement, and the text has often been suspected. The LXX may have read ' lift high your spears.' Cornill suggests 1 arm yourselves with' spears' (cf. 2 Sam. xxiii. 7). coats of mail. These 'may have consisted of some thick woven material covered with, metal scales ' ¦ (JEna Bib. 606). 5. No sooner are the preparations complete and. the battle joined than :the army is put to flight. Wherefore have I seen it ? The Hebrew is difficult. The LXX rightly omits the verb, 'Wherefore are they dismayed?,' &c. If it is retained, it would be better to render 'Wherefore do I see them to be dismayed ? ' ', " . . terror is on every side: a characteristic expression of Jeremiah's; here very appropriate and effective : see note on vi. 25. 1. The Egyptians were smitten in the north, by Jeremiah's foe from the north, on the banks of the Euphrates. And now, in fine contrast to the Euphrates, comes the Nile. Isaiah had spoken of the waters of the Euphrates, strong and many, overflowing the banks and sweeping into Judah, threatening the very life of the Jewish people (Isa. viii. 7,8). Jeremiah speaks of the Nile rising, while the waters of its branches toss themselves. The rising of the Nile worked no. havoc, but was the condition of its country's fertility. It therefore did not suggest military conquest, like the flooding of the Euphrates, and is aptly chosen as a symbol of Egypt's hollow military pretensions. ., 8. and his waters . . . rivers: omitted "in LXX; several critics strike out also the first clause of the verse. The LXX also JEREMIAH 46. 9, io. J 217 the earth ; I will destroy the city and the inhabitants thereof. Go up, ye horses ; and rage, ye chariots ; and 9 let the mighty men go forth : Cush and Put, that handle the shield; and the Ludim, that handle and bend the bow. For that day is a day of the Lord, the Lord ,c of hosts, a day of vengeance, that he may avenge him of his adversaries : and the sword shall devour and be satiate, and shall drink its fill of their blood : for the Lord, the Lord of hosts, hath a sacrifice in the north country by omits ' the city and,' to the improvement of the sense. It may have arisen out of a reminiscence of xlvii. 2. If it is' retained, it is, best explained as collective, ' cities,' rather than as referring to any city in particular. 9. This verse may be a continuation of Pharaoh's words, or it may be the prophet himself who incites the contingents of the Egyptian army to the battle which is to end in such swift irretriev able disaster. The former view seems to be preferable. The king urges his hosts to the battle to fulfil his proud boast in the preceding verse. Let the horses prance, let the chariots rush furiously forward, let the soldiers advance to the conflict. Cush : i. e. Ethiopia. Put is probably Punt, a land on the Red Sea. Cush and Put both occur as ' sons of Ham ' in Gen. x. 6. The mercenaries from these countries formed the heavy-armed soldiers, and the Iiudim the archers. The Ludim seem to have been a Libyan people on the west of Egypt ; perhaps we should read Lubim, i. e. Libyans, as in Nah. iii. 9, ' Put and Lubim were thy helpers' (Stade). In any case they are not' the Lydians of Asia Minor. The three peoples are mentioned similarly in Ezek. xxx. 5. handle and bend the bow. It would be better to read simply ' bend the bow,' literally ' tread the bow ; ' ' handle ' is a careless repetition from the previous clause. 10. In this verse a note of vengeance is struck, which is not strange when we consider that the untimely death of Josiah and the captivity of Jehoahaz had happened only a few years earlier at Egypt's hands. The passage is very similar to Isa. xxxiv, 6, 8 ; but, since Isa. xxxiv is a late composition, our passage is probably the original: cf. Zeph. i. 7, Ezek. xxxix.. 17-20. The sword is the sword of the enemy, not of Yahweh as the LXX reads under the influence of Isa. xxxiv. 6. Coste (p. 7) prefers the LXX, regarding the Hebrew text as ' due to dogmatic alteration, occasioned by dis like of such an anthropomorphism as " the sword of Yahweh " ' (so also xlix. 37, and perhaps xlvii. 6). 218 JEREMIAH 46. n-15, JEJ 11 the river Euphrates. Go up into Gilead, and take balm, O virgin daughter of Egypt : in vain dost thou use many 12 medicines; there is no healing for thee. The nations have heard of thy shame, and the earth is full of thy cry : for the mighty man hath stumbled against the mighty, they are fallen both of them together. 13 |R] The word that the Lord spake to Jeremiah the prophet, how that Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon should come and smite the land of Egypt. 14 [J] Declare ye in Egypt, and publish in Migdol, and publish in Noph and in Tahpanhes : say ye, Stand forth, and prepare thee ; for the sword hath devoured round 15 about thee. aWhy are thy strong ones swept away? " Or, according to some ancient authorities, Why is thy strong one swept away ? hi stood not Zfc. 11. The wound of Egypt is incurable: though she go into Gilead to -procure its far-famed mastic (viii. 22) ; though she tries one remedy after another, all are in vain ; no physician, though the reputation of her physicians was so high, has compounded a plaister (xxx. 13) which will heal her. 13. thy shame. The LXX reads ' thy voice,' which gives a better parallelism ; the change is trifling. the mighty man . . .the mighty: cf. Lev. xxvi. 37. In the shameful panic described in 5, 6 the warriors tumble over each other in their blind flight from the foe. 14. For the places named in this verse see ii. 16, xliv. 1. It would be better, however, to adopt the shorter text of the LXX. ' Declare ye in Migdol, and publish in Noph,' i. e. in the frontier town and the capital of Lower Egypt. The tenor of the declara tion follows : Egypt is bidden stand forth to repel the enemy, whose sword has already devoured the surrounding peoples. For 'round about thee' the LXX seems to have read 'thy thicket,' which is accepted by Schwally and Cornill. This is supported by the simile in 22, 23, but it is Very questionable if it yields a satisfactory sense. It would be necessary to render ' is devouring,' since if the thicket had already been cut down the day for defence would have gone by. j 15j 71le Hebrew reads the singular, except in the word ren dered 'thy strong ones,' for which the singular should no doubt be substituted, with several Versions and more than sixty Hebrew JEREMIAH 4G. 16, 17. J 219 they stood not, because the Lord did a drive them. He made many to stumble, yea, they fell one upon 1.6 another : and they said, Arise, and let us go again to our own people, and to the land of our nativity, from the oppressing sword. They cried there, Pharaoh king of 1 7 * "fOr, thrust them down MSS. The text, however, needs a further alteration. The verb rendered ' swept away ' is really two words written as one ; the LXX gives us the correct text, ' Why is Apis fled ? Thy strong one stood not, because the Lord did thrust him down.' Apis was the sacred bull, in which Osiris was believed to be incarnate. The god of Egypt cannot stand before the assault of the Baby lonians (cf. Isa. xix. i, xlvi. 1, 2, and x. 4, if we are to read with Lagarde, * Beltis bows down, Osiris is broken '). 'Thy strong one ' is then a synonym for Apis ; the Hebrew word is often used for bulls. In viii. 16, xlvii. 3, it is used of horses, so also l. 11. 16. The reference to a return home shows that the speakers are foreigners ; apparently not the mercenaries but traders : cf. Isa. xiii. 14. But this does not suit the present text, fora reference to the foreigners should have preceded. Giesebrecht, with a slight emendation {'erWka for hirbah and kdshal for koshel), reads ' Thy mingled people have stumbled and fallen, and they said one to another, Arise,' &c. This is supported by the LXX, accepted by Duhm, Erbt, and Driver, and is probably correct. For ' the min gled people' cf. 1. 37, Ezek. xxx. 5, f Kings x. 15, and the note on xxv. 20. Cornill is dissatisfied with this, since the insertion of the foreigners seems to him unsuitable here. He supposes that Jeremiah is still referring to Apis ; and, eliminating the greater part of the. verse, reads 'He hath sorely stumbled, yea fallen, before the oppressing sword.' 17. A difficult verse. We should read, with a different point ing, ' Call ye the name of Pharaoh' (so LXX). They are to call him sha'on he'ebir hammo'ed. This name apparently contains a play on the king's name; if so, the second word must refer to Hophra, whose name in Egyptian is Tjah-ab-ra : cf. for a similar contemptuous word-play on' Egypt Isa. xxx. 7. The obscurity of the clause is'probably due to the difficulty of getting a satisfactory word-play on the name. Cornill argues that the prophecy must be contemporaneous with Hophra, and if so, certainly authentic. This is on the whole probable, though Duhm considers the verse to be a marginal gloss, and Giesebrecht says that a later Rabbi could quite well have perpetrated a Witticism of this kind. Even Rothstein, who regards the passage as Jeremianic, thinks that this sentence is quite prosaic and certainly does not belong to the 220 JEREMIAH 46. 18-20. J Egypt is but a noise ; he hath let the appointed time pass 18 by. As I live, saith the King, whose name is the -Lord of hosts, surely like Tabor among the mountains, andhke 19 Carmel by the sea, so shall he come., a O thdu daughter that dwellest in Egypt, b furnish thyself to go into cap tivity : for Noph shall, become a desolation, and shall be 20 burntup, without inhabitant. Egypt is a very fair heifer-; * Or, O thou. that dwellest with the daughter of Egypt b Heb. make thee vessels of captivity. original text, and passes the same judgement on 18. But a later writer would be likely to know that the king who was reign: ing when Nebuchadnezzar invaded Egypt was Amasis, The meaning of the name is not clear; 'a Crash, who has let the appointed time pass by' is perhaps the best rendering. He has let the time go by when he might have secured himself against this calamity ; or perhaps better, He has let the time in which the Divine mercy might have been granted pass by. 18. As Tabor towers high, over the mountains, and as Carmel rises sheer above the sea, so the ,foe who comes on Egypt will overtop other conquerors. Tabor is not the loftiest mountain of Palestine, but it makes the impression of ;great height because it rises from the plain; and similarly Carmel by the sea, though its actual height is only about 600 feet. The metaphor was perhapssug- gested to Jeremiah by the flatness of Egypt, which, was such a con trast to Palestine. The conqueror is not named; Nebuchadnezzar is intended. If the passage is late, Schmidt's suggestion that he is Alexander the Great is plausible. , , 10. O thou daughter. The population of Egypt is addressed, andbidden get ready the 'vessels! of captivity' (see margin), i. e. the necessaries for a journey such as food and utensils (in Ezek. xii. 3 the same phrase is translated 'prepare thee stuff for removing'). Such preparations are imposed on the inhabitants by the destruc tion of Memphis, the capital. 20. In a fresh metaphor the poet describes the disaster of Egypt She is ' a graceful heifer ' (for this rendering see Driver, P. 3P8), well-nourished and finely proportioned, but a gadfly has come upon her, stinging her into flight. This, since Hitzig, is the generally accepted view, though the rendering ' gadfly ' is not universally accepted. Cornill corrects the text and reads 'a herdsman {boqer) from the north shall become her master {b°'aldh) ' He thinks a personal designation more suitable to the connexion He also transposes the last part of ai, 'for the day . . . visitation ' JEREMIAH 46. 21, 22. J 221 but a destruction out of the north is come, b it is come. Also her hired men in the midst of her are like calves of 2 1 the stall ; for they also are turned back, they are fled, away together, they did not stand : for the day of their calamity is come upon them, the time of their visitation. 0 The sound thereof shall go like the serpent ; for they shall 2 2 march with an army, and come against her with axes, as *fOr, the gadfly b +Or, according to many ancient autho rities, upon her c fOr, Her sound is like that of the serpent as itgoeth to the close of this verse, to secure a better balance of the two similes, and because the reference to visitation suits Egypt herself better than her mercenaries. 21. The mercenaries who were hired to fight proved useless in the day of conflict. For they were pampered like calves fed up in the stalls, and were thus utterly unfit for the stern realities of warfare. The mercenaries here mentioned are not those of 9, but the Ionians and Carians, introduced into his service by Psam metichus, and retained by his successors. Hophra did not send them on the expedition against Cyrene ; they failed to secure him victory over Amasis (Herodotus ii. 152 ff.). 22, 23. These verses are obscure. If we leave the text as we have it, but adopt the rendering in the margin, 23" seems to mean either that Egypt's movement in retreat is inaudible, like the rustle of the serpent as it glides through the wood, not like the tramp of a mighty host, or else that Egypt's moan after her defeat is as inaudible. In either case the point is the weakness of Egypt. The former is perhaps the better. The LXX, however, instead of 'the serpent as it goeth,' reads 'a hissing serpent.' This is probably to be preferred. Egypt is like a serpent driven back from its lair by the advance of the woodmen ; it can offer no more resistance than an impotent hiss of defiance. The metaphor is all the more appropriate since the serpent holds so conspicuous a place in the royal insignia of Egypt. Cornill thinks that 23 should be attached to 22\ It is not so suitable in its present ^position, but follows 221 admirably and is equally in place before W. In 22", 23" the foe is described as approaching, with axes, and cutting down Egypt as a dense, impenetrable forest, so thickly populated was it. It is disputed whether the Babylonians actually used battle-axes ; if they did use them this might have suggested the metaphor to the prophet. 2.2.2 JEREMIAH 46. 23-28. J B 23 hewers of wood. They shall cut down her forest, saith the Lord, » though it cannot be searched; because they a4 are more than the locusts, and are innumerable. The daughter of Egypt shall be put to shame ; ^he shall be 25 delivered into the hand of the people of the north. The Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, saith : Behold, I will punish Amon of No, and Pharaoh, and Egypt, with her gods, and her kings ; even Pharaoh, and them that trust 26. in him : and I will deliver them into the hand of those that seek their lives, and into the hand of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, and into the hand of his servants : and afterwards it shall be inhabited, as in the days of old, 27 saith the Lord, [s] bBut fear not thou, O Jacob my servant, neither be dismayed, O Israel : for, lo, I will save thee from afar, and thy seed from the land of their cap tivity ; and Jacob shall return, and shall be quiet and at 28 ease, and none shall make him afraid. Fear not thou, 0 a jOr, for b See ch. xxx. 10, 11. hewers : better ' gatherers,' though a slight alteration would give 'hewers,' which is much more appropriate. They shall cut down. The verb is better pointed as an im perative ' Cut down,' as in vL 6. 25. The LXX gives a much shorter and better text. It omits 'The Lord . . . saith,' also 'and Pharaoh . . . her kings.' For ' Amon of No ' the LXX reads ' Amon in No.' Amon was the god of No, i. e. of the Egyptian Thebes : cf. Nah. iii. 8, Ezek. xxx. 14-16. them that trust in him. Jeremiah has specially in mind the Jews whose inveterate trust in Egypt is once more doomed to disappointment. 26. This verse is absent, in the LXX, and regarded by several as a later insertion. Cornill treats it as in the main genuine. He says that a6» must be earlier than Nebuchadnezzar's expedition, since matters turned out otherwise than as predicted, and the closing promise to Egypt is supported by Ezek. xxix. 13, 14, where after forty years' desolation Egypt is to be repeopled. 27, 28. These verses are also found in xxx. 10, 11, and are discussed there. JEREMIAH 46. as— 47. i. SB 223 Jacob my servant, saith the Lord ; for I am with thee : for I will make a full end of all the nations whither I have driven thee, but I will not make a full end of thee ; but I will correct thee with judgement, and will in no wise a leave thee unpunished. [R] The word of the Lord that came to Jeremiah the 47 a Or, hold thee guiltless xlvii. Oracle on the Philistines. The authenticity of this oracle has been denied by those who reject all the oracles on foreign nations, also by Gillies who thinks nothing is authentic in this section except parts of xlvi. Those who are prepared to recognize a Jeremianic nucleus in this section of the book usually take the present oracle to be by Jeremiah. And there is no substantial objection to this. Moreover, as Cornill points out, this oracle seems to be quite independent of other prophecies on the Philistines, the points of contact with thembeing too slight to justify any theory of dependence. Had it been a late Composition it would probably have borrowed not a little from its predecessors. The date must be determined primarily from the prophecy itself; it belongs to the same period as most of the series, Le. the fourth year of Jehoiakim (xlvi. a), and the army which is to come on Philistia from the north is that of Nebuchadnezzar, the victor at Carchemish. The title, it is true, suggests a different occasion, a conquest of Gaza by a king of Egypt. According to Herodotus (II. 159), Pharaoh Necho after the battle at Magdolos, i. e. Megiddo, captured Kadytis, which since Hitzig's Dissertation on the subject (1829) has been generally identified with Gaza. And it is in fact probable that this is intended in I, for that he 'smote Gaza' on his retreat from Carchemish is highly improbable ; and we have no evidence to support the theory that Pharaoh Hophra conquered Gaza on his expedition against Phoenicia (Herod. II. 161). But if the title refers to the. capture of Gaza in 608 b.c. we must ascribe the chronological notice to an editor, who took the mention of Gaza in 5 as referring to that event. This is supported by the fact that it is missing-in the LXX, which reads simply, ' On the Philistines. Duhm assigns it to the author of xlvi, and therefore at the earliest to the second half of the second century b. c. Schmidt dates it m the time of Alexander the Great, 'though the editor may. have thought of the conquest of Gaza (defended by Demetrius) by Ptolemy in 312 ' {Enc. Bib. 2391). Erbt regards 6, 7 as certainly authentic, 2 may or may not be, 3-5 he takes to be editorial. 224 JEREMIAH 47. 2-4. EJ prophet concerning the Philistines, before that Pharaoh smote Gaza. 2 [jj Thus saith the Lord : Behold, waters rise up out of the north, and shall become an overflowing stream, and shall overflow the land and all that is therein, the city and them that dwell therein : and the men shall cry, and 3 all the inhabitants of the land shall howl. At the noise of the stamping of the hoofs of his strong ones, at the rushing of his chariots, at the rumbling of. his wheels, the fathers look not back to their children for feebleness of hands ; 4 because of the day that cometh to spoil all the Philistines, xlvii. I. Title and date. 2-7. A flood rises out of the north and will overwhelm the land. The rush of horses and chariots causes the fathers for weak ness to forget their children, since Philistia and Phoenicia are spoiled. The cities of Philistia mourn. How long, sword of Yahweh, ere thou be quiet ? Return to thy scabbard, and be still. How can it be quiet, seeing Yahweh has appointed its mission ? xlvii. 1. See the Introduction to the chapter. 2. Cf. Isa. viii. 7, 8. The waters, i. e. the invading army, come from the north ; the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar are intended. During the' summer many of the water-courses of Palestine are dry, but in the rainy season they quickly fill with raging torrents, which overflow their banks. and the men . . . howl : struck out as an insertion by Cornill and Rothstein. It is criticized on metrical and stylistic grounds, and as introducing an eschatological element, foreign to the passage. > 3. Such is the terror inspired by the wild rush of the foe's steeds and war-chariots, that even the fathers are unnerved and leave their children behind them in their panic-stricken flight. Giese brecht, on metrical grounds, regards ' At the noise . . . wheels ' as an insertion. The description would be impoverished by the omission. Cornill cures the metrical irregularity by omitting ' at the rushing of his chariots.' 4. The text is again uncertain. If it is correct, the R Y gives the probable sense : the Philistines, the sole remaining help of the Phoenicians, are cut off. That they really sustained a relation of such importance to Tyre and Sidon is improbable. The word rendered 1 ' that remaineth ' means properly ' a survivor,' one who escapes from disaster, and this does not suit ' to, cut off; ' besides JEREMIAH 47. 5. J 225 to cut off from Tyre and Zidon every helper that rerriairi- eth : for the Lord will spoil the Philistines, the remnant of the a isle of Caphtor. Baldness is come upon Gaza ; 5 B Or, sed coast a survivor is not well qualified to act the part of a helper. Cornill reads 'and to cut off for Tyre and Sidon the whole remnant of their strength.' This had been given by Duhm as the original of the LXX, and is to be preferred to his own emendation. The incidental and unexpected mention of the Phoenicians seems to the present writer a suspicious feature. This would be somewhat mitigated, though by no means removed, if with Duhm we con tinued 'for Yahweh will spoil the whole remnant of the isles.' The LXX supports this. Cornilland Giesebrecht keep the Hebrew text, but regard the clause as a fgloss, a judgement Rothstein extends to the whole verse. Caphtor is probably Crete, from Which the Philistines originally came. Caphtor is named as their original home in Amos ix. 7, Deut. ii. 23 (in the latter passage they are described as Caphtorim) ; the identification of Caphtor with Crete is supported by the name Cherethites given to the Philis tines (1 Sam. xxx. 14, Ezek. xxv. 16, Zeph. ii. 5). 5. For the mourning customs here mentioned see note on xvi. 6. Gaza is mentioned first of the Philistine towns, as in Zeph. ii. 4., where the order is geographical, proceeding from south to north : Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Ekron. It was a very impor tant city, since it stood at the junction of the caravan road from Arabia and that from Egypt. It has still a considerable popula tion. Cornill corrects Ashkelon into Ashdod. It is true that the omission of Ashdod is surprising, and that Ashkelon is mentioned in 7 (but see notes on 6, 7). The two names begin similarly, but the substitution of one for the other is precarious. It would be better, with Rothstein, to insert it before Ashkelon (but see below), and suppose that it has fallen p.ut through the. similarity of the two words. It is generally agreed that ' the remnant of their valley '_ is incorrect, since it is unsuitable ; ' valley ' is not a fitting designation of the Philistine plain, and we expect a proper name. This is given by the LXX 'the remnant of the Anakim' (a difference of one consonant). The Anakim were a race of giants (Num. xiii. 22, 28, 33 : cf. Gen. vi. 4 ; Deut. i. 28, ii. 10, ix. 2 ; Joshua xi. 21, 22, xiv. 12-15, xv. 13, 14) ; they are connected with Hebron,1 but also according to Joshua xS. 22 with Philistia. This emendation is accepted by most modern scholars. Adopting the suggestion that Ashdod should be inserted in the text, it would be better, since no Anakim were left in Ashkelon, but only in Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod (Joshua xi. 22), to insert it after Ashkelon rather than 11 Q 226 JEREMIAH 47. 6—48. i. J Ashkelon is brought to nought, the remnant of their 6 valley i how long wilt thou cut thyself? O thou sword of the Lord, how long will it be ere thou be quiet? put up 1 thyself into thy scabbard; rest, and be still. How canst thou be quiet, seeing the Lord hath given a thee a charge? against Ashkelon, and against the sea shore, there hath he appointed it. . 48 Of Moab. Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of ' » Heb. it. before it. The verse would then read ' Baldness is come upon Gaza; Ashkelon is brought to nought ; Ashdod, remnant of the Anakim, how long wilt thou cut thyself? ' Cornill reads ' remnant of Ekron,' which had been previously suggested by Krochmal. In some ways this is preferable, but it is a more difficult emendation and has no attestation. cut thyself. There may be a play in the Hebrew verb tithgodadt on the name of Gath. But this is not very probable. Gath is omitted in Zeph. ii. 4, and had perhaps been destroyed. 6, f. These verses are separated from' the preceding by some scholars, partly on metrical grounds. Giesebrecht treats them as an obvious addition, on account of ' the swprd of Yahweh :' cf. xlvi. 10. But if this is.objectionable we might simply read ' the sword.' There is no convincing reason for detaching the verses from their context. Verse 6 is apparently the cry of the Philistines ; 7 the answer of the prophet. For ' How canst thou ' we should read with the Versions ' How can it,' and of course with the margin, 'given it a. charge.' 'The sea shore' is the Philistine coast- the Phoenician coast may perhaps be included. xlviii. Oracle on Moab. This section arouses suspicion both by its length in contrast' to the other oracles in xlvi-xlix, and its use of earlier prophecies, especially Isa. xv, xvi. Movers and Hitzig both assumed that the chapter contained a good deal of secondary matter, the former attributing twenty verses to the supplementer, Hitzig twenty- three. They agreed largely, though not completely, as to the verses whichshould be treated as secondary. Graf confessed that Jeremiah would not lose if such interpolation were admitted, but he con sidered that the reasons alleged for excision were insufficient. Kuenen assigned sixteen verses to the editor. All three agreed *n regarding 29-38 (Hitzig 38"), 43-46 as editorial. Giesebrecht, JEREMIAH 48. i. J 227 Israel : Woe unto Nebo ! for it is laid waste ; Kiriathaim after a detailed examination, left a few verses which might be genuine, but in view of the fact that they were in harmony with the rest of the chapter he considered it to be arbitrary to separate them from their context and treated the whole as spurious. Cornill and Rothstein agree that there is a genuine Jeremianic nucleus, though they reconstruct it very differently. Schmidt brings the chapter down to the reign of John Hyrcanus ; and Duhm, on the ground that it draws upon very late passages, says that it can hardly be older than the close of the second century B. c. Even KOberle omits it. The question can be dealt with to profit only in the detailed discussion of the chapter. But one general remark may be made here. Admitting that Jeremiah uttered oracles on the foreign nations, it is fairly certain that Moab would be included. If then we find an oracle on Moab in this section, there is a pre sumption that it contains at least a genuine nucleus, which may have suffered expansion ; it is not antecedently probable that it should be entirely spurious. At the same time, in view of the length and diffuseness of the oracle, the prosaic character of some of its parts, the extensive borrowing from earlier writers, the animosity which seems at a later period to have been felt for Moab (Isa. xxv. 10-12), there is a strong presumption that the original oracle, if such can be found, has been much expanded. The chapter is remarkable for the large number of place-names contained in it, a feature that it has in common with the oracle on Moab in Isa. xv, xvi, from which it has borrowed so extensively. The sites of some are unknown, and of some more than one iden tification has been proposed, in yet other cases the text is suspicious. xlviii. 1-10. Yahweh announces the overthrow of Moab and its cities ; let the inhabitants save themselves by flight. Chemosh and his people shall go into exile, and the land become a desolation. Cursed be he that doeth this work of Yahweh negligently. 1 1- 19. Moab has been left undisturbed from his youth, and his character has not been disciplined by unsettlement ; now he will be driven out of his land, and his trust in Chemosh will be put to shame. His warriors are slain, and the wail is raised over him : The strong staff is broken ; Dibon's glory is humbled ; Aroer asks the fugitives for tidings. 20-28. Moab is, spoiled, judgement has come on all his cities. Moab has vaunted, himself against Yahweh, and shajl be made a derision, as he had held Israel in derision. Let the inhabitants take refuge in the rocks. . 29-39. We have heard of Moab's pride. I will wail for the ruin of its vineyards. The whole land, utters its cry. The wor- Q 2 228 JEREMIAH 48. 2. J is put to shame, it is taken : a Misgab is put to shame 2 and b broken down. The praise of Moab is no more ; in Heshbon they have devised evil against her, Come, and let us cut her off from being a nation. Thou also, O Madmen, shalt be brought to> silence ; the sword shall a fOr, the high fort. ., , • b +Or, dismayed, i — --L—±i LUttl _l i i-L* , _ shippers are cut off. I am sore grieved for Moab ; its inhabitants are all. in mourfiing, for Moab is broken, a derision to all around him. 40-47. The conqueror swoops oh Moab like a griffon, and destroys it for its arrogance against Yahweh ; none shall escape death or exile. Yet Moab's fortune shall be reversed in the latter days. xlviii. 1. Nebo is not Mount Nebo, but a hill-town, perhaps on or near the mountain. It is mentioned in Num. xxxii. 3, 38, Isa. xv. 2, and on the Moabite Stone. Kiriathaim is probably to be identified with Kureyat, which lies ten miles to the north of the River Arnon, and six to the north of Dibon, ten to the east of the Dead Sea, and four to the soutli-west of Jebel Atarus. Misg-ab . i . dismayed. Misgab is mentioned nowhere else, and is perhaps to be rendered ' the high fort,' as' in Isa. xxv. 12, in which case, Kir-heres (31, 36) may be intended. Duhm thinks we should substitute Moab ; Giesebrecht suggests Ar-Moab ; Cheyne {Enc.Bio. 3153) omits 'it is taken ... shame and ' as due to dittography. Rothstein reaches the same result by a different route. The repetition of ' is put to shame ' is probably due to an error, and the Hebrew at the close of the verse is strange. 2. Heshjbon, now Hesban, was a famous city of Moab, about four miles to the north-east of Mouht Nebo, twenty-five to the north of the Arnon, and sixteen east of the Jordan. It was the city of Sihpn, king of the Amorites, who had taken all the territory, of Moab down to the Arnon (Num. xxi. 26) and then lost it to the Hebrews ; at a later time the Moabites regained possession of it, as We gather from Isa. xv. 2, xvi. 8, 9. The verb rendered ' de vised' contains a play on Heshbon, similarly with Madmen and brought to silence.' Madmen, however, is otherwise unknown, and we should probably read, with LXX, Syr;, and Vulg., ' Thou also shalt be utterly brought to silence.' Cheyne reads Nimrim {Enc. Bib. 2892, 3147). Sirice Heshbon was a city of Moab, some think the statement in the text that they plan «vil against Moab in Heshbon is meaningless, and emend the text. Giesebrecht's is perhaps the best correction, 'Against Heshbon they have devised evil. But the present text is satisfactory : the invaders, entering JEREMIAH 48. 3-6. JSJ 229 pursue thee. The sound of a cry from Horonaim, spoil- 3 ing and great destruction! [s] Moab isdestroyed; her little 4 ones have caused a cry to be heard. a For by the ascent 5 of Luhithwith continual weeping shall they go up; for in the going down of Horonaim they have heard the disr tress of the cry of destruction. [ J] Flee, save your lives, and 6 a See Isa. xv. 5. Moabtfifom the north, occupy Heshbon and plan the continuance of their campaign. 3. The position of Horonaim is uncertain. Cheyne places it ' near the south border of Moab, on one of the roads' leading down from the Moabite plateau to the Jordan valley' {Enc. Bib. 2 113), and a similar view is taken by several scholars. Cornill adopts the identification', but thinks that a place more to the north is needed, which bears the brunt of the invasion from- the north ; he reads ' from Abarim * as in xxii. 20, ' cry from Abarim ' (see note). On G. A. Smith's map of Palestine Horonaim is placed (with a query) about one and a half miles from the north-east end of the Dead Sea. If this identification were correct, Cornill's objection would be met. 4. her little ones . . . heard. We should read, with the LXX and a few Hebrew MSS., ' they make a cry to be heard unto Zoar :' cf. Isa. xv. 5. Zoar lay at the south-east extremity of the Dead Sea, the cry of the Moabifes thus rings from north to 'south of the land. Possibly, however, for Moab We should read Ar Of Moab (Isa. xv. 1), a city on the south bank of the Arnon, since in the list of Moabite towns the mention of Moab itself is sur prising. S. This verse is largely taken from Isa. xv. 5, which had already influenced 4. Both verses are probably non-Jeremianie. The ascent of Luhith is said to lie between Rabbath-Moab and Zoar; it was apparently in the neighbourhood of Horonaim (see 3). It is identified by some with Sarfa, north of the Wady Kerafe. Its mention in a Nabataean inscription found in Moab is doubtful. Cheyne reads here ' the ascent of Eglaim.' Omit ' continual'' and ( f-jiP distress of 6. This exhortation to the Moabites to save themselves by flight is probably corrupt in the latter part. On the word rendered ' heath ' see note on xvii. 6 j if a tree is intended here we should probably render ' dwarf ' juniper,' and explain the metaphor as indicating the starved and destitute condition of the fugitives. But the expression is undeniably strange, and since the translation 'destitute' is unsatisfactory, and 'Aroer,' which the word also 230 JEREMIAH 48. 7-9- Js 1 be like a the heath in the wilderness. For, because thou hast trusted in thy works and in thy treasures, thou also shalt be taken : and Chemosh shall go forth into cap- 8 tivity, his priests and his princes together. [S] And the spoiler shall come upon every city, and no city shall escape ; the valley also shall perish, and b the plain shall be 9 destroyed ; as the Lord hath spoken. Give wings unto Moab, e that she may fly and get her away : and her cities shall become a desolation, without any to dwell therein. a See ch. xvii. 6. * See Joshua xiii. 9, 17, 21. c Or, for she must fly : and her cities tfc. . means, is not in the wilderness, several scholars suspect the text. The LXX reads 'the wild ass' {'drod), as in Job xxxix. 5 ; the word is probably a loan-word from Aramaic, and the sense is not unsatisfactory, the wild ass being very shy and difficult to capture. Cornill accepts this, but thinks the verb is corrupt and several objections may be urged against it. Duhm thinks on account of xvii. 6 that the noun is correct, but slightly altering thfe verb gets the sense 'and preserve it (i.e. your life) like the dwarf juniper in the wilderness.' This is recommended by the fact that it retains the play on Aroer the Moabite city (19). 7. thy works . . . treasures. If the text is correct, ' works' may mean the deeds of Moab, or the things she has made, or, as the word sometimes means, her idols. But the LXX reads one noun only and renders ' strongholds,' which should be accepted (see 41), either in lieu of both nouns, or of the former only. Chemosh : the national god of Moab, often mentioned as such in the O.T. and on the Moabite Stone. For his deportation into exile cf. Isa. xlvi. 1, 2. A victory over a people was a victory over its god. For the latter part of the verse cf. Amos i. 15, their kmg ' being taken apparently to mean the god of Ammon, 1. e. Milcom : cf. xlix. 3. 8-10. Cornill treats these verses as non-Jeremianic ; Rothstein, retains o* ' and her cities . . . therein ' for the prophet. A senti ment like that in 10 (cf. Judges v. 23) cannot well be attributed to Jeremiah, the Hebrew of 8 is unusual, and the meanine of q» is very uncertain. .i,8'r,thj valley is the valley of the Jordan as it opens out near the Uead Sea, while the plaia is the table-land of Moab on which its cities for the most part lay. 1 9" T*u RLV" Probably S'ves the general sense of the first clause, though the rendering ' wings ' is justified only by' later JEREMIAH 48. io-i3. SJ 231 Cursed be he that doeth the work of the Lord anegli- 10 gently, and cursed be he that keepeth back his sword from blood. [J] Moab hath been at ease from his youtfi, n and he hath settled on his lees, and hath not. been emp tied from vessel to vessel, neither hath he gone into captivity : therefore his taste remaineth in him, and his scent is not changed. Therefore, behold, the days come, 12 saith the Lord, that I will send unto him them that bpour off, and they shall bpour him off; and they shall empty his vessels, and break their c bottles in pieces. And Moab shall be ashamed of Chemosh, as the house 13 a Or, deceitfully b fHeb. tilt (a vessel). « fOr, jars usage. We should render, with Driver, ' Give wings unto Moab, for she would fain fly away : ' cf. 28. It seems to be spoken in mockery. IO. This bloodthirsty verse is surely not Jeremiah's. It was Hildebrand's favourite quotation. 11. The metaphor is well worthy of Jeremiah. Moab had led a much more settled life than Israel ; it had, of course, suffered from invasion and foreign dominion, but not from exile. It had been like wine suffered to remain on the lees, and not poured from vessel to vessel. And the effect of this had been that the quality of the lees was more and more communicated to the wine. If the wine was good it was thus improved (cf. Isa. xxv. 6), butif inferior it deteriorated (cf. Zeph. i. I2>. Moab had suffered by its freedom from the discipline of removal, its character had not been enriched by new experience, it had become more and more obstinately settled in its 'native characteristics, its ' taste ' and ' scent,' learning nothing, forgetting nothing. 12. This long-continued freedom from disturbance is at last to end. Yahweh ' will send unto him tilters, and they shall tilt him,' empty the wine from the vessels and break the jars in pieces. In other words, he is to be thrown into exile. Since Jeremiah expected the catastrophe in the immediate future, we should probably omit the opening words of the verse which relegate it to an indefinite future. m 13. Then Moab's trust in Chemosh will experience a bitter dis illusion, as Israel had vainly trusted in Beth-el (cf. Amos v. 5). At Beth-el there was the golden bull, the symbol of Yahweh ; and this, or perhaps the pillar of Jacob, is here intended as the object of Israel's trust. That the writer should refer to Beth-el rather 232. JEREMIAH 48.. 14-18. > J 14 of Israel was ashamed of Beth-el their confidence, .How say ye, We are mighty men„and yaliant men for the war? 15 Moab is laid waste, and a they are gone up into her cities, and his chosen young men are gone down to the slaughter, 16 saith the King, whose name is the Lord of hosts. The calamity of Moab is near to come, and his affliction hast- 1? ethfast. All ye that are round about him, bemoan him, and all ye that know his name; say, How is the strong 18 b staff broken, the beautiful rod! O thou daughter that c dwellest in Dibon, come down ifrOm thy glory, arid sit in * Or, her cities are gone 'up in smoke b Or, sceptre '-'•¦ 0 0r, art seated than Jerusalem, suggests that the overthrow of ithe latter/had n,^.- yet occurred, a noteworthy proof i,|hat the chapter contains a pre- exilic element. , ' ashamed of : i. c. .disappointed in, see on ii, 26 and cf. ii. 36, xii. 13, a very clear case of the inesnjng,, xiv. 3, ; ',{ j.t 14. ,|Cf. yiii.;8, Isa. xix, irv ,,, .. j, . ,,,-,,: .,.¦'-. , , 1- lft. This isj a. difficult verse, the Hgbrew, is strange ; the LXX omits a good deal, and. differs in ^he text of wJiat, it, retains. It wpuld perhaps be simplest to read,inuG^ias in 18, 'The spoiler of Moab is come up, against him,,and his,' &c., though several other emendations iiave been suggested.. The verse may perhaps be editorial. , ; 1 ; 16.' Cf Isa. xiij. 22, Deut. xxxii, 35. 17. The neighbouring peoples are summpn;e,d to raise the lament over Moab's downfall. For the words of the lament, introduced with the characteristic, 'b Bezer (Deut. rW 43 ; Joshua xx. 8, xxi. 36). It is perhaps to be identified with Ktisr el Besheir, which lies about two miles south-west of Dibon and two north of Aroer. Jahzah is the scene of the defeat of Sihon (Num. xxi. 23, 24). It is also called Jahaz. Eusebius locates it between Medeba and Dibon. Mephaath is elsewhere associated with Jahaz (Joshua xiii. 18, xxi. 37 ; 1 Chron. vi. 79) : presumably ftey were near together. See above on the plain !(8), Dibon (i8),Nebo (1), 234 JEREMIAH 48. 21-28. SJSJ 2i And judgement is come upon » the plain country ; upon 22 Holon, and upon Jahzah, and upon Mephaath ; and upon 23 Dibon, and upon Nebo, and upon Beth-diblathaim ; and upon Kiriathaim, and upon Beth-gamul, and upon Beth- 24 meon ; and upon Kerioth, and upon Bozrah, and upon 25 all the cities of the land of, Moab, far or near., [J] The horn of Moab is cut off, and his arm is broken, saith the 26 Lord. [S] Make ye him drunken; for he magnified himself against the Lord : and Moab shall wallow in his 27 vomit, and he also shall be in derision. For was not Israel a derision unto thee ? was he found among thieves ? for as often as thou speakest of him, thou waggest the 2 8 head. [ J] O ye inhabitants of Moab, leave the cities, and dwell in the rock ; and be like the dove that maketh her a See ver, 8, Kiriathaim (1). For the last clause of 24 cf. xxv. 26, also at the close of a catalogue. 25. This verse connects well with 201. The 'horn' (Ps. Ixxv, 10) and ' arm ' are metaphors for might. 26, 21. With these verses the metre is again abandoned. The figure of drunkenness comes from xxv. 15-29, and the sickening realism of 26b in the Hebrew text is suggested by xxv. 27, which seems to be an editorial insertion (see note on xxv. 27-29).' We should probably regard these verses as a later interpolation. As in Isa. xxv. 10, 11, Moab is depicted in a situation at once disgusting and ridiculous. The LXX,, however, reads 'And Moab has clapped his hands.' This gives an excellent sense : Moab has clapped his hands in derision of Israel, he shall himself become an object of derision. The Hebrew verb rendered ' wallow ' (for which ' splash ' would be better) does not bear this meaning else where, and this supports the LXX. We should have to assume that the Hebrew text had been corrupted under the influence of xxv. 27, and it is not quite easy to believe this. For the second clause of 26 cf. 42. found among thieves ? Was Israel discovered in the Company of thieves, caught stealing, that Moab mocked at him ? Cf. ii. 14, 26. Wagging the head was a gesture of derision : cf. Ps. lxiv. 8, Mark xv. 29. 28. The metre is here resumed, and the verse connects well JEREMIAH 48. 29-33. JS 235 nest in the sides of the hole's mouth. [S] aWe have 29 heard of the pride of Moab, that he is very proud ; his loftiness, and his pride, and his arrogancy, and the haughtiness of his heart. I know his wrath, saith the 30 Lord, that it is nought; his boastings have wrought nothing. b Therefore will I howl for Moab ; yea, I will 31 cry out for all Moab : for the men of Kir-heres shall they mourn. With more than the weeping of Jazer will I weep 32 • See Isa. xvi. 6. b See Isa. xv. 5, xvi. 7, 11. with 25. It is a fine verse, admirably suited to the situation, since the country offers many refuges to fugitives in the rocks, and countless doves build their nests in them. The closing words of the verse, however, are very strange. Giesebrecht suggests ' in the holes of the rocks of the precipices ; ' Rothstein (in Kittel) ' in the clefts ' simply. Cornill gives the passage up. 29-38. This section is almost entirely derived from Isa. xv, xvi, and is not an improvement on the original. Some Jeremianic elements are perhaps embedded in it, but the passage as a whole is late. 29, 30. A very diffuse expansion of Isa. xvi. 6. For the pride of Moab cf. Isa. xxv. 11, Zeph. ii. 8-10, and perhaps the Moabite Stone ; but, as Cheyne only too truly says, 'all national monuments of this sort have a tendency to exaggeration ' {Pulpit Commentary, ad loc). Render 30, '/ know, saith Yahweh, his wrath ; and his boastings are untruth ; they do untruth ' (Driver). 31. Derived from Isa. xvi. 7, but with alterations. The earlier passage gives a logical connexion ; Moab's pride will lead to Moab's wailing over his misfortune. Here by the substitution of the first person, obviously under the influence of Isa. xvi. 9, the prophet's grief over Moab's fate is strangely represented as due to Moab's pride. ' The men of Kir-heres ' is probably a textual error for ' the raisin-cakes of Kir-heres ' rather than a deliberate alteration. On the raisin-cakes see Whitehouse's notes on Isa. xvi. 7 ; they were made of pressed grapes and fine meal ; and had a place in religious festivities (cf. Hos. iii. 1). Kir-heres (in Isa. xvi. 7 Kir-hareseth) is probably identical with Kir of Moab (Isa. xv. 1), the modern Kerak, eight miles east of the Dead Sea, and about seventeen miles south of the Arnon. It was a very strong fortress, near the south frontier of Moab. 32. From Isa. xvi. 8, 9, but with change of order, and textual variations. At the beginning of the verse we should probably read simply ' With the weeping ' (so Isa. xvi. 9) or ' As with the weep- 236 JEREMIAH 48.33, 34- gJs for thee, a0 vine .of Sibmah: thy branches passed over the sea, they reached even to the, sea of Jazer: upon thy summer fruits and upon thy vintage the spoiler is fallen,, 33 [J] b And gladness and joy is taken away,- frorn^ the fruitful field and from the land of MJoab ; [S] and I have, caused. wine to cease from the winepresses : none shall tread with 34 shouting ; the shouting shall be no shouting., ° From the a See Isa. xvi. 8, 9,, ViSee Isa. xvi. 10. ° See Isa/ xv, 4, &c, ¦ ing' (so LXX). Jazer is commonly identified with Sar, ten miles north of Heshbon and seven west of Rabbath Ammon. Sibmah is two and a half miles west-north-west of Heshbon. Its vines must have been famed for their choice quality and fruitfulness. The poet expresses this under the. metaphor of a gigantic vine which sent out its branches south-west over or to the Dead Sea and: north to Jazer^read 'even to1 Jazer ;' 'the sea of is a mistaken insertion from the previous clause, there is no lake at Jazer). Isaiah gives an eastern, direction also, ' they wandered into the wilderness,' For ' the spoiler ' read ' the battle shout' as in Isa. xvi. 9 (see note on next verse). ¦,. ' ,. ,. ¦. , . ¦ , . . , 33. From Isa. xvi. 10, but mutilated in the latter part. Cornill thinks that the words' ' And gladness and joy is taken away from the land of Moab ' belong to the original poem of Jeremiah ; he quotes as parallels vii. ,34, xvi. 9, xxv. 10. For 'none shall tread with shouting' we should read, with, Isa. xvi. 10, ' no treadpr shall, tread.' i. The Hebrew is very harsh,, and ' shouting ' is due to the following clause. The word rendered ' shouting ', might be Used for the vintage shout, or the battle shout. The writer means that there will be a shouting, in the vineyards, but it will not be the vintage shout as the grapes are trodden in the winepress, but the shout of the soldiery as they trample the vineyards down. 34. From Isa. xv. 4-6, much abbreviated. The opening of the verse gives no sense. Giesebrechfc with a, slight alteration reads, ' How criest thou, Heshbon and Elealeh ; ' Duhm, ' Crying are Heshbon and Elealeh.' For Heshbon see 2, for Jahaz see 21, for Zoar and Horonaim see 3. Elealeh was two miles north-west, of Heshbon. Egiathtshelishiyah seems to mean the third Eglath; the name would distinguish it from two other Eglaths in the neighbour hood (cf. the "three Strefctons; which are close, together, Little Stretton,. Church Stretton, and All Stretton). Its site is, unknown, presumably it was near Horonaim. Duhm supplies the want of a verb by correcting 'from Zoar even unto,' and reading 'Horonaim and Eglath-Shelishiyah call out.' The 'waters of Nimrim ' are not iden tified, with certainty. They were probably in the south of Mpab, JEREMIAH 48. 35-38. SJS 237 cry of Heshbon even unto Elealeh, even unto Jahaz have they uttered their voice, from Zoar even unto Horonahnj ato Eglath-shelishiyah : for the waters of^Nimrim also shall become b desolate, [j] Moreover I will cause to 35 cease in Moab, saith the Lord, him that offereth in the high place, and him that bufrieth incense to his gods. [S] Therefore mine heart soundeth for Moab like pipes, 36 and mine heart soundeth like pipes for the men >of Kir- heres : therefore the abundance that he hath gotten is perished. For every head is bald, and every beard 37 dipped : upon all the hands are cuttings, and upon the loins sackcloth. On all the housetops of Moab and in 3§ the streets thereof there is lamentation every where : ¦¦- Or, as an heifer of three years old b Heb. desolations. perhaps the Wady Numeirah which runs into the Dead Sea near its southern extremity. The desolation is due to the stopping of the sources, as we read in 2 Kings iii. ,25 with reference to the campaign of Israel, Judah, and Edom against Moab, 'they stopped all the wells of water.' 35. This verse has points of contact with Isa. xv. 2, xvi. 12, but seems not to be based upon them, and Cornill considers it, apart from ' saith the Lord,' to be a part of Jeremiah's prophecy. The Hebrew does not bear the rendering 'him that pffereth in ;' probably this is the sense intended : a slight change yields this sense. 36. From Isa. xvi. 11, xv. 7*. The sympathetic tone is note worthy, though for the first ' mine heart * the1 LXX reads ' the harp of Moab.*' ! 'Pipes' is substituted for 'harp;' they were used at funerals (Matt. ix. 23). Theverb is less suitable here. The latter part of the verse is difficult, since 'therefore' is inappropriate; the A.V. renders ' because,' but this is rather questionable. 37. For ' baldness' and 'gashes' as sighs of mourning see xvi. 6, xlvii. 5. The passage is based on Isa. xv. 2, 3. We learn only from it that cuttings Were made in the hands. For ' the lions ' we should read 'all lions,' with LXX and Vulgate. • 38i The former part of the verse is derived from Isa. xv. 3. The latter' part, however, is independent of the oracle in Isaiah, and is regarded by Cornill as, part, of Jeremiah's prophecy, since it is with slight excision metrically correct, and the metaphor is gen uinely jeremianic (xxii. 28 : see note). It is dubious whether this latter feature favours the authenticity. 238 JEREMIAH 48. 39-45- JSSJS [JS] for I have broken Moab like a vessel wherein is no 39 pleasure, saith the Lord. How is it broken down ! » how do they howl ! how hath Moab turned the back with shame ! so shall Moab become a derision and a dismaying 40 to all that are round about him. [S] For thus saith the Lord : Behold, he shall fly as an eagle, and shall spread 41 out his wings against Moab. b Kerioth is taken, and the strong holds are surprised, and the heart of the mighty men of Moab at that day shall be as the heart of a woman 42 in her pangs. And Moab shall be destroyed from being a people, because he hath magnified himself against the 43 Lord. c Fear, and the pit, and the snare, are upon thee, 44 O inhabitant of Moab, saith the Lord. He that fleeth from the fear shall fall into the pit ; and he that getteth up out of the pit shall be taken in the snare : [J] for I will bring upon her, even upon Moab, the year of their 45 visitation, saith the Lord, [s] dThey that fled stand " Or, howl ye ! * +Or, The cities are taken c See Isa. xxiv. 17, 18. a Or, Fleeing because of the force they stand under 39. Here again Cornill claims for Jeremiah the latter part of the verse. 40, 41. For these verses the LXX gives simply ' For thus saith the Lord : Kerioth is taken, and the strong holds are surprised.' The rest of the verses has been inserted from xlix. 22, with the necessary alteration of the proper names. Probably we should render ' the cities' instead of ' Kerioth,' on account of the parallel ism ; if the word is a proper noun cf. 24. The eagle symbolizes the conqueror. 42. Cf. 2, 26. 43, 44* occur also in Isa. xxiv. 17, 18" with slight differences, and a general reference to the earth rather than the specific refer ence to Moab. Our passage is probably the later. Cf. Lam. iii. 47, Amos v. 18-20. The Hebrew for ' Fear, and the pit, and the snare ' is pahadwdpaliath wapah; the assonances cannot be reproduced in English. For 44b cf. xi. 23", xxiii. 12. Cornill assigns it to the original poems. 45-47 are absent in the LXX, which proceeds from 44 to the vision of the wine-cup, i.e. to xxv. 15 in the Hebrew. Verses 45, 46 are taken, except the beginning of 45, from Num. xxi. 28, 29, JEREMIAH 48. 46—49. i. SJ 239 without strength under the shadow of Heshbon : a for a fire is gone forth out of Heshbon, and a flame from the midst of Sihon, and hath devoured the corner of Moab, and the crown of the head of the tumultuous ones. Woe 46 unto thee, O Moab ! the people of Chemosh is undone : for thy sons are taken away captive, and thy daughters into captivity. Yet will I b bring again the captivity of 47 Moab in the latter days, saith the Lord. Thus far is the judgement of Moab. [J] Of the children of Ammon. Thus saith the Lord : 49 1 Or, but See Num. xxi. 28, 29. b Or, return to xxiv. 17J The opening words of 45 are far from clear. That the fugitives should shelter under the walls of Heshbon is strange, since they would rather be fleeing south. That Heshbon belonged to Ammon is not probable, in spite of xlix. 3 (see note) ; so that the fugitives are not represented as taking refuge at a foreign city. Instead of ' the midst of Sihon ' we should read, with trivial alter ation, ' from the house of Sihon ; ' Num. xxi. 28 reads ' city of Sihon,' i.e. Heshbon. Sihon took it from the Moabites, the Hebrews took it from him, now the Moabites had recovered it The text in the latter part of 45 is better than in Num. xxiv. 17. 47. Cornill regards the promise of ultimate restoration as Jere mianic. The closing words are an editorial note indicating the close of the oracle. Rothstein thinks the writer means that at the time of writing the judgement of Moab still continued • the restor ation belonged to the future. xlix. 1-6. Oracle on Ammon. An oracle on Ammon is quite to be expected among Jeremiah's prophecies on the nations, since like Moab and Edom it was akin to Israel and lived on its borders. The authenticity of the present prophecy is, however, decidedly rejected not only by those who believe all the oracles on the nations to be late, but by Giesebrecht. He urges that the people which is to invade Ammon remains quite obscure ; the idea^that Israel will take Ammon's land while it is in exile contradicts the representation in xxv that Israel is in banishment at the same time ; and that Gilead should again fall to Ammon seems a strange withdrawal of the previous threats and promises. But as to the first of these, Giesebrecht admits a genuine element in the following oracle on Edom, though the foe remains just as obscure. The second objection is very weighty, 24o JEREMIAH 49. 2, 3. JSJ Hath Israel no sons ? hath he no heir ? why then doth a Malcam b possess Gad, and his'people dwell hi the cities 2 thereof? Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the LoitD, that I will cause an alarm of war to be1 heard against Rabbah of the children of Ammon; and it shall become a desolate c heap, and her daughters shall be burned With fife : [S] then shall Israel b possess them that 3 did b possess him, saith the Lord. [ j] Howl, O Heshbon, a Or, their king b Or, inherit c See ch.' jixx. 18; but may be satisfied by the surrender of that element in the oracle, and the same answer may be made to the third. After the deportation of Gad with others of the northern tribes in 734 b. c, the Ammonites who dwelt on the east of Gad's territory probably availed themselves of the opportunity to annex the fertile land. Amos i. 13-15 should be compared. xlix. 1-6. Has Israel no sons, that Milcom's people dwell in Gad's cities ? Behold, Rabbah shall be made desolate and her daughter cities ; then israel will enter again oh possession. Let the Ammonites lament, Milcom shall go into captivity. Why glory in thy valley, rebel daughter, expecting no foe ? Panic shall geige thee, and. every one be driven out. But afterward Ammon shall be restored. . . xlix. 1. The oracle opens With a question quite in Jeremiah's manner (cf. ii. 14 and often), Is it because Israel has no childrerl to possess it, that Ammon has appropriated the territory of Gad! No, even if Gad were extirpated, there were other tribes of Israel to claim the rights of next-of-kin. Malcam should probably here and in 3 be pointed Milcom (so LXX, Syriac, and Vulgate), who was god of the Ammonites, as Chemosh of the Moabites. 2. Kabbah Was the chief city of Ammon ; it lay about thirteen miles north-east Of Heshbon. 'Her daughters ' afe, of course, the smaller cities. then shall Israel . . . the LORD. This clause recalls Zeph. 11. 9 ; but, apart from the vlndictivehess of it (cf. Isa. xiv. 2), it raises the difficulty touched oh already, that since Israel was to gO into exile at the same time as Ammon, it would not be in a position to resume possession of its former territory. The clause should probably be omitted, as by Cornill. 3. This verse is difficult. Even if the existence of an otherwise unknown Ammonite city Ai were granted, the mention of Hesh bon would be strange, since this was a Moabite city, though close on the border of Ammon. Graf supposed that Ai should be JEREMIAH 49. 4> 5. J 24! for Ai is spoiled ; cry, ye daughters of Rabbah, gird you with sackcloth .: lament, and run to and fro among the fences ; for a Malcam shall go into captivity, his priests and his princes together. b Wherefore gloriest thou in 4 the valleys, thy flowing valley, O backsliding daughter ? that trusted in her treasures, saying, Who shall come unto me ? Behold, I will bring a fear upon thee, saith the 5 * Or, their king b Or, Wherefore gloriest thou in the valleys? thy valley flouieth away emended into Ar (city), thinking that as the capital of Moab was called Ar-Moab, that of Ammon might be called ArjorAr-Ammon. It would be simpler, with Cornill, to read ' the city ' .{hd'ir). For 'Heshbon ' he proposes 'children of Ammon,' but this. is not easy ; Duhm accepts the former emendation, but for 'Heshbon ' reads ' palace ' {'armon), also not quite easy. Rothstein does not challenge '.Heshbon,' but eliminates Ai by reading '-for thou art spoiled.' Cornillthinks a line is missing after ' Rabbah,' and sug gests, in accordance with X 12, 'for your mother is put to shame.' The close of the verse is. taken from Amos i. 15. - '. fences. The word properly means ' walls ; ' it is used with reference to sheep-folds, and the explanation is given (that they should run to and fro in the open country, among the sheep-folds, because the cities could no longer afford them a shelter.' But the text can hardly be right, the idea is most unnaturally expressed. What we need in this description is some expression of mourning. Giesebrecht proposed an emendation for the whole clause which may be rendered ' and having cut yourselves, wallow (in dust).' Duhm suggested a similar correction, but it would be simpler to read, with Cornill, 'run to and fro in mourning attire.' 4. This verse also is difficult. The Hebrew rendered 'thy flowing valley ' is strange ; we -have probably to do with a case of dittography, and should read simply ' Wherefore gloriest thou in thy valley? ' i. e. the valley in which Rabbah was situated, a very well-watered and fertile valley. The epithet ' backsliding ' is also surprising as applied to a heathen people ; Duhm's emendation, t careless,'- 'arrogant' (cf. Isa. xlvii. 7-10), gives an excellent sense.- She trusts in her abundant supplies and inaccessibility to attack. ;¦-..-- 5. On this people, thus incredulous of calamity.shall fall a panict inspired by an onslaught of her neighbours, and each shall seek his own safety in: a flight which recks nothing of the safety of others, and which rwill not be retrieved. ' Every man right forth ' is literally 'every man before .him.' II R 242 JEREMIAH 49. 6, 7. JSJ Lord, the Lord of hosts, from all that are round about thee ; and ye shall be driven out every man right forth, and there shall be none to gather up him that wandereth. 6 [s] But afterward I will bring again the captivity of the children of Ammon, saith the Lord. 1 1 [J] Of Edom. Thus saith the Lord of hosts : Is 6. This verse is wanting in the LXX, and is probably a later addition. xlix. 7-22. Oracle on Edom. Of this oracle, equally with those on Moab and Ammon, we mightsay that it has in its favour the fact that Edom was so closely akin to Israel in blood and stood in such intimate relations to it in history that the absence of any oracle upon it would be surpris ing. The length of this section suggests that, as in the case of Moab, a Jeremianic original may have been expanded ; and this is made still more probable by the close parallel with the Book of Obadiah. xlix. 9, io" corresponds to Obad. 5, 6 ; xlix. 14-16 to Obad. 1-4 ; and there are slighter points of contact. The critical problem thus presented is very complicated, largely on account of the uncer tainties in which the criticism of Obadiah is involved. Since in its present form this book is clearly later than the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 b. c, when the Edomites displayed a bitter hostility towards Jacob (Obad. 10 ff.), it cannot have been used by Jeremiah in a prophecy dating from the fourth year of Jehoia kim. Inasmuch, however, as a comparison between the two texts shows that Obadiah on the whole preserves a more original form than Jeremiah, it has been very widely held that both prophets quote from an earlier oracle, which Obadiah has reproduced more faithfully : and this opinion is still held by several eminent critics, including Driver, G. A. Smith, and J. A. Selbie (' Obadiah ' in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible). The problem has, however, passed into a new stage, due to the development of criticism with reference to both books. So far as Obadiah is concerned, several of the foremost Old Testament scholars, including Giesebrecht, Cornill, Duhm, Nowack, and Marti, have accepted the view put forward by Wellhausen that the two prophets did not quote from an earlier prophecy, but that the original work of Obadiah con sisted of Obad. 1-5, 7, 10-14, i5>>, and was wholly written some time after the destruction of Jerusalem, not to announce the approaching downfall of Edom, but to describe the ruin which had already overtaken it. This was the expulsion of the Edomites from their country by the Arabs. The prophecy was brought into JEREMIAH 49. 7. J 243 wisdom no more in Teman ? is counsel perished from the connexion with the conditions which lie behind the Book of Malachi. As criticism stands with reference to the Book of Jere miah, no veto is imposed on Wellhausen's theory by the quotation from Obadiah in the present passage. Assuming that the version in Jeremiah is secondary, there is no difficulty in regarding it as a late insertion in a Jeremianic oracle ; or if on other grounds the authenticity of our oracle be denied, in assuming that its post- exilic author made use of the quotation. If the extracts in Jeremiah are indissolubly connected with their context, this would carry with it an acceptance of the latter alternative. The ques tion as to the criticism of Obadiah need not be further pursued here ; the student may refer to the discussion devoted to it in the commentary on that Book by R. F. Horton and the literature mentioned above ; an admirable statement and defence of Well hausen's view is given by G. B. Gray in the article on ' Obadiah ' in Hastings' One Volume Dictionary of the Bible. So far as our passage is concerned, we should probably adopt the view that a genuine Jeremianic nucleus is to be recognized, but that there has been considerable expansion. Even Giesebrecht assigns 7-1 1, with the exception of 9, to Jeremiah. Cornill agrees as to these verses, but thinks that 22 should be added to them, at least a quatrain having been omitted in the revision. The object of the revision was, he considers, the same here as in the case of Moab, to make the catastrophe as crushing as possible, both nations being special objects of Judah's hatred in the later period. xlix. 7-12. Has Teman lost its wisdom? Let the Dedanites flee, for calamity comes upon Edom at Yahweh's hand ; he will not be able to conceal himself; he is destroyed, and must leave his orphans and widows in the care of Yahweh. 13-22. For Bozrah and all the cities shall be laid waste ; the nations are summoned to war against her, and she shall be made small; her proud security is her ruin ; all that pass by it will be astonished at her fate. The land shall be as forsaken as the cities of the Plain. A lion will come and drive them from their home stead. They shall be dragged away helpless. The earth will tremble at the crash, of their fall. One shall swoop upon Bozrah like a griffon, and the heart of Edom's warriors shall be in anguish. Xlix. 7. This versehas some likeness to Obad. 8, but is not taken from it. If Wellhausen's reconstruction of the original prophecy of Obadiah is correct, Obad. 8 is a later insertion ; in that case it was probably introduced from this passage.. Teman was strictly a dis trict of Edom, probably in the north-east of that country, since Dedan (see xxv. 23), which lay on the south of Edom, is repre- R 2 244 JEREMIAH 49. 8-io. JSJ 8 prudent ? is their wisdom vanished ? Flee ye, turn back, dwell deep, O inhabitants of Dedan ; for I will bring the calamity of Esau upon him, the time that I shall visit him. 9 [S] If grapegatherers came to thee, tt would they not leave some gleaning grapes ? if thieves by night, would they not i o destroy till they had enough ? [ j] , But I have made Esau bare, I have uncovered his secret places, and he shall not be able to hide himself: his seed is spoiled, and his a fOr, they will leave no gleaning grapes ; if thieves by night, they will destroy till they have enough. For &c. See Obad. 5. sented in Ezek. xxv. 13 as at the other extremity. Its chief town seems from Amos i. 12 to have been Bozrah, unless Teman is there used for Edom as a whole. Eliphaz, the friend of Job, was a Temanite ; but it is questionable if this verse substantiates the current opinion that Edom was famed for its wisdom. Cornill thinks that the second part of the line which is missing after ' Teman,' if we have Qina rhythm here, may perhaps have run 'discernment in Bozrah.' 8. The Dedanites (xxv. 23) ;on the southern border of Edom are bidden to flee and 'dwell deep' in some impenetrable retreat, lest they be overwhelmed by theblast of judgement which is to sweep over Edom. The last clause of the verse should be ' the time of his visitation ' (so LXX, Vulgate). 9. This verse is derived from Obad. 5, where the meaning is that whereas thieves would steal only till they had enough, and grape- gatherers would leave grapes for the gleaners who followed them, the enemy has left nothing but made a clean sweep. The applica tion is different here. The rendering in the margin gives the true sense ; and the enemy are not contrasted with the grapegatherers and thieves, but represented under these figures. The main point is the same, that the ruthless foe spares nothing. 10. This has a parallel in Obad. 6, which probably does not belong to the original prophecy, but has been inserted in Obadiah from our passage, like Obad. 8 (see note on 7). The superiority in sense lies with our passage, since it fits the context; the Dedanites are bidden flee to their retreats (8), but Yahweh has made this im possible for Edom, his retreats are all discovered. The first person pronoun is emphatic. his seed ... is not. Cornill reads simply < he is spoiled and is not ; partly on metrical grounds, partly because the reference to the seed conflicts with 11. Rothstein agrees for the former reason ;- Giesebrecht omits simply ' and his brethren and his neigh- JEREMIAH 49. u-14. JS 245 brethren, and his neighbours, and he is not. Leave thy 11 fatherless children, I will preserve them alive; and let thy widows trust in me. [s] For thus saith the Lord: 12 Behold, they a to whom it pertained not to drink of the cup shall assuredly drink; and art thou he that shall altogether go unpunished ? thou shalt not go unpunished, but thou shalt surely drink. For I have sworn by myself, 13 saith the Lord, that Bozrah shall become an astonishment,' a reproach, a waste, and a curse ; and all the.cities thereof shall be perpetual wastes. bI have hearj-L tidings from 14 - Or, whose judgement was not b See Obad. 1-4. hours.' The LXX reads the word rendered ' seed,' as 'arm ',(or 'hand' ); on this basis Duhm reads 'he is spoiled by the arm of his brothers and neighbours.' 11. In this context a very striking verse, which forms a noble contrast to the unmeasured hate of Edom which characterizes many passages. It is easier to believe that it is Jeremiah's utter ance than that of another.. As Cornill truly says, it is -remarkable that it was not expunged. The Divine judgement destroySrthe warriors of Edom, but it does not root out women and children ; they are indeed made widows and orphans, but Yahweh will pity their forlorn condition and tenderly comfort and preserve tbem. , 12. Cf. xxv. 15-28 for thecup of Yahweh's wrath. This verse rests upon xxv. 28, 29, it cannot well be Jeremiah's, for he- held that the people of Yahweh were pre-eminently worthy to drink the cup. ' He would have been the last to say that Judah or Israel had been punished without deserving it ' (Schwally).. No doubt the fact that its punishment is spoken of as* still future might be plausibly urged" in favour of a date before 586 B.C. But such, an anticipation as is expressed in this verse might well have been uttered from the standpoint of the later eschatology. 13. Giesebrecht prints the verse as secondary, but says that it may perhaps have formed the conclusion of the oracle.- Cornill treats it as secondary, since it is written in prose. Bozrah is commonly identified with Bnsaireh, about twenly miles south-east of the Dead Sea, thirty- five north of Petra ; though R. A. S. Macalister says, 'The guesses that have been made at its identification are of no importance ' (Hastings' One Volume Bible Dictionary^. 14-16. These verses are parallel to Obad. 1-4, and derived from it. The words with which they open stand much better at the 246 JEREMIAH 49. 15, 16. S the Lord, and an ambassador is sent among the nations, saying, Gather yourselves together, and come against her, 15 and rise up to the battle. For, behold, I have made thee small among the nations, and despised among men. 16 As for thy terribleness, the pride Of thine heart hath beginning of a prophecy as in Obadiah, than in the middle as here. The prophet (for ' I ' Obadiah reads ' We,' i.e. prophet and people) has received a Divine communication ,; a messenger is sent to stir the nations against Edom (cf. Isa. xiii. 2-4). , 15. irhe consequent humiliation of Edom. 16. The opening of the verse is very difficult, perhaps incurably corrupt. The word rendered, ' As for thy terribleness ' is absent from Obadiah, and occurs nowhere else. If this rendering is cor rect, the meaning may be that although the formidable character of Edom, due to her almost impregnable position, had indeeid led her to deem herself beyond peril, Yahweh by bringing her down Would convince her that her pride had playedi.her false. More probably it is an exclamation meaning either 'Oh thy shud dering!' i.e: when the unexpected calamity overtakes thee, or 'Oh the shuddering for thee!' i.e. for the shuddering thy fate inspires in the spectators. Duhm has made a remarkably ingenious suggestion. He points the last word of 15 so as to yield the sense 'through Edom thy Horror ;' Edom being interpreted as the name of a god. We have no proof that Edom was the name of a god, though several scholars believe that it was, and Obed-edOm might be quoted in corroboration (see S. A. Cook's note in Enc. Bib. 3462). Duhm takes the word to be a gloss, since it is absent in Obadiah. In his translation, however, he renders ' and despised of men thy image of horror.' The description of Edom's almost inaccessible position is very true to the 'facts. ' Its capital, Petra, lay in an amphitheatre of mountains, accessible only through the narrow gorge, called the Sik, winding in with precipitous sides from the west; and the mountain sides round Petra, and the ravines about it, contain innumerable rock-hewn cavities, some being tombs, but others dwellings, in which the ancient inhabitants lived ' (Driver). 'The interior is reached by defiles, so narrow that two horsemen may scarcely ride abreast, and the sun is shut out by the over hanging rocks. . . ; Little else than wild-fowls' nests are the villages ; human eyries perched on high shelves or hidden away in caves at the ends of the deep gorges ' (G. A. Smith, The Book of the Twelve Prophets, ii. p. 179). As the last writer further points out, it was 'a well-stocked, well-watered country, full of food and lusty men, JEREMIAH 49. 17-19. s 247 deceived thee, O thou that dwellest in the clefts of n the rock, that holdest the height of the hill : though thou shouldest make thy nest as high as the eagle, I will bring: thee down from thence, saith the Lord. And Edom 17 shall become an astonishment : every one that passeth by it shall be astonished, and shall hiss at all the plagues thereof. As in the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah 18 and the neighbour cities thereof, saith the Lord, ho man shall dwell there, neither shall any son of man sojourn therein. Behold, he shall come up like a lion from the 19 b pride of Jordan c against the strong habitation : d but I will suddenly make him run away from her ; and whoso is chosen, him will I appoint over her : for who is like me? and who will appoint me a time? and who is the 1 Or, Sela See 2 Kings xiv. 7. b Or, swelling c -j-Or, unto the permanent pastures d fOr, for I will suddenly drive them away yet lifted so high, and locked so fast by precipice and slippery mountains, that it calls for little trouble of defence.' the rock. This is probably the correct rendering, but there is an allusion to Sela, i.e. perhaps Petra, which lay fifty miles; south pf the Dead Sea, in the situation described in the preceding note. If was the capital of the Nabataeans. 17. Almost identical with xix. 8 ; cf. xviii. 16, 18. The neighbour -cities are Admah and Zeboim, Deut. xxix. 23 : cf. Hos. xi. 8. The verse is repeated in 1. 40. Notice 'son of man,' used as the equivalent of 'man.' 19-21. Repeated in 1. 44-46, with adaptations to Babylon. 19. The foe comes up against Edom as a lion comes from the jungle to the pastures in search of prey. The word rendered ' strong ' is rather ' permanent.' We may render ' permanent homestead,' explaining 'an abode of long standing and likely to endure.' The adjective is not very suitable; Duhm suggests ' pasture of rams ; ' Cornill improves this excellent suggestion, read ing 'pasture of sheep.' He continues 'so will I suddenly drive them away, and their choice rams will I visit.' No shepherd will be able to withstand the foe, for Yahweh urges it on. appoint me a time? i. e. for a contest : cf. Job ix. 19. No power is strong enough to challenge Yahweh. 248 JEREMIAH 49. 20-23. SJ 20 shepherd that will stand before nie ? Therefore hear ye the counsel of the Lord, that he hath taken against Edom; and- his purposes, that he ihath purposed against the inhabitants of Teman : Surely? they shall drag them away, even the little- ones of the flock; surely he , shall, make 21 their b habitation, & desolate with thenl,: The, earth trern- bleth -at the noise, of their fall ; there is a cry, the, noise 22 whereof is heard in the Red Sea. [J] Behold, he: shall, come up and fly as the -eagle; and spread out ibis wings against Bozrah: and the heart of the mighty men of Edbm at that day shall- be asthe heart ofa womanin her pangs; •." * " i -¦' 23 Of Damascus. <• Hamath, is ashamed, and: Arpad ; for " Or, thelittle ones of the flock shall drag theqn away h Or, pastures _ c Or , astonished at them 20. When the lion pounces on the flock, a lion so fierce and powerful thaf no shepherd can withstand himy the helpless sheep are draggedoff-fo ' bei xlevbmred.^ . Duhm ' and- CqrniiU, render; ' the shepherd lads '.instead, of 'fihe little ones ofth,e, flock,' • -,, 22.,[Corfiillfthinks thafcthis verse, w.ithrijts simile of the eagle so appropriate to tthe' foerwhicih.'itrikes^at Edom-jjn ifs mquntain fastnesses, formed the conclusion, of the. originaLgrpphecy, and |that one quatrain at least must haveibeeja strueki,ou,t(!bi^tiyj;een,ii an/j 22. This verse has been -employed' in xlyjii, 40, 41.' , - ,. ; \ ' -u ,,-:' •¦_' ; \ '--,- , -I -,.. - : ,; xhx. 23-27. Oracle on D^ascus. The authenticity of, this oracle is rejected by Cornill and KoberleJ not to mention other scholars.. Certainly there are diffi culties in accepting it. ;; Too much importance m,ust not be attached to the fact that the title does not quite harmonize with the ,1 con tents; which.are concerned also with Hamath and Arpad (cf. Isa. xvii,, 1-11). The charge that the, situation, is, very indefinitely described applies- to Other oracles,>the genuineness- of which we have accepted ; and granting that it dates from, 605 B.C., there was no need to describe conditions familiar !to all. More seriousis the absence of any reference to. these cities in the vision of judgement (xxv. 18 ff.) If Jeremiah at this time composed an oracle onthem, it is not easy to understand why they are not included in the list of those who drank the cup. If this objection is not fatal, there JEREMIAH 49. 24, 25. J 249 they have heard evil tidings, they are melted away : there is a sorrow on the sea ; it cannot be quiet. Damascus is 24 waxed feeble, she turneth herself to flee, and trembling hath seized on her : anguish and sorrows have taken hold , of her, as of a woman in travail. How is the city of 2s " 1 Or, care is no decisive reason against recognizing a genuine nucleus (so Rothstein). The last verse is imitated from the refrain in Amos i. 3 — ii. 5, and corresponds closely to Amos i. 4 (see on xvii. 27). We find 26 also in 1. 30 ; it may be original here, but ' Therefore ' is more appropriate there. These two verses are accordingly, not unlikely to be an addition. No serious difficulty lies against 24,25; except that the language of 24 is rather conventional and contains an Aramaism. Verse 23 is not quite so easy to accept in its present form, but it is generally recognized that the text incorrupt. On the whole, the present writer inclines to regard- 23-25 as by Jeremiah. -•-••) xUx. 23-27. Hamath and Arpad are dismayed; Damascus in terror turns to escape. The city is forsaken. Therefore her warrigrs shall be overthrown ; and a fire from Yahweh, shall devour the palaces of Ben-hadad. L . , ; . ,, xKx. 23. Hamath, now called Hama, still an important town, was a famous city of Syria, situated on the Or'ontes, no miles north of Damascus. Arpad, now Tell-Erfad, which is often mentioned with it (Isa. x. 9, xxxvi. 19; xxxyii. 13), lay 95 miles further north, and 10 miles north of Aleppo. The prophet des cribes the terror and paralysis due to the tidings they have heard, i. e. of Nebuchadnezzar's advance. . _ there is . . . quiet. This clause is unintelligible in its present form ; there is no sea at Damascus. Several scholars read ' like the sea ; ' Cornill objects that the raging sea.is very unsuita ble to describe a people in terror, and with a slight emendation reads ' they are melted away there from care.' The present text may have arisen through the influence of Isa. lvii. 20. ^ _ 24. Damascus was a very ancient city ; for long the chief city in Syria. trembling : the word is Aramaic. 25. The text can hardly be correct ; we expect ' How is the city of praise forsaken.' The omission of the negative gives the right sense but it is not easy to understand its insertion. Cornill reads ' Woe is me, for the city of praise is forsaken.' The closing words show that a Damascene is speaking, unless with several Versions we read 'the city of joy.' In that case Duhm's 'Woe to her would need to be substituted for Cornill's ' Woe is me.' 250 JEREMIAH 49. 26-28. JSJ ^ 26 praise not forsaken, the city of my joy ? [s] Therefore her young men shall fall in her streets, and all the men of war shall be brought to silence in that day, saith the 2 j Lord of hosts. And I will kindle a fire in the wall of Damascus, and it shall devour the palaces of Ben-hadad. 28 [J] Of Kedar, and of the kingdoms of Hazor, which Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon smote. 26. Therefore is here quite unsuitable ; if 1. 30 is borrowed from our passage, the latter may have been influenced in turn by it, or the original text may have been ' Surely.' 27. Cf. Amos i. 4. Several kings. Of Damascus bore the name Ben-hadad. xlix. 28-33. Oracle on Arab Tribes. Like the preceding oracle, this also is rejected by Giesebrecht, Cornill, and Koberle. '" Oh the other hand Winekler, though with rather drastic textual criticism, Erbt, and Rothstein have accepted its authenticity, at least in part. Such an oracle we are led to expect by the reference to Arab tribes in xxv. 23. ¦ It is not quite clear why such an oracle should have been composed in the post-exilic period.' It is true that the Arabs arei represented as then hostile to Judah, and: the spread of the Nabataeans might have occasioned a prophecy against them. But the fact that Nebuchadnezzar is expressly mentioned as the enemy leaves us with the pre-exilic date, or a deliberate; ante-dating of the oracle, as our only alternatives. It is- probable that here, as elsewhere, a prophecy by Jeremiah hasbeen expanded by a later writer. The influence of Ezekiel is fairly clear in 30, 31. *• ' xlix. 28-33. Yahweh gives" the order to spoil Kedar of tents and flocks, of hangings and camels. . Let the inhabitants of Hazor;find a remote retreat, for Nebuchadnezzar has designs against them. Let them take refuge with a people secure from invasion. Their camels and cattle shall be the victor's spoil; they themselves shall desS°iat-ered t° all the winds; and their land shall be a perpetual . .J11?-.28/ K.f,dar (see »• 10) was the name of a prosperous Arab In 1,?1'v'n1|I"v,,laSe<:o"'munitiesin the wilderness, often mentioned J™ X ' Test?™ent and the cuneiform inscriptions. Hazor is tow^ oiL"™- f°r lr"S ''" PaleStine ' here !t «>ay bean Arabian town, otherwise unknown to us ; or it may be the name of a district where the Arabs had settled down and dwelt in villages JEREMIAH 49. 29-32. JS 251 Thus saith the Lord : Arise ye, go up to Kedar, and spoil the children of the east. Their tents and their flocks 29 shall they take ; they shall carry away for themselves their curtains, and all their vessels, and their camels : and they shall cry unto them, Terror on every side. Flee ye, 3° wander far off, dwell deep, O ye inhabitants of Hazor, saith the Lord; for Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon hath taken counsel against you, and hath conceived a purpose against'you. [S] Arise, get you up unto a nation 3' that is at ease, that dwelleth without care, saith the Lord ; which have neither gates nor bars, which dwelt alone. And their camels shall be a booty, and the multitude of 32 their cattle a spoil : and I will scatter unto all winds them that have the corners of their hair polled; and I will bring their calamity from every side of them, saith the the name being derived from'the Hebrew'tertn for village (cf. Isa. xiii. xi). 'Kingdom' is strange; the LXX gives 'queen,' which Winckler, Schmidt, and Erbt accept. We read elsewhere of queens in this region. ' ' The children of the east ' are the Arabian tribes on the east of Palestine. 29. It is the nomads rather than the settled tribes that are here in mind. The curtains are the tent hangings, as in iv. 20. Terror on every side: a Jeremianic expression, which, of course, might |>e due to a conscious attempt to simulate the prophet's style, v", 30. The writer is'either Jeremiah ormeansto be taken for him, since the circumstances presupposed are those of Jerehviah's time. The exhortation 'dwell deep' is less suitable to Bedawin than to the Edomites to whom it is addressed in 8. It has not improbably been mistakenly introduced here from that verse. 31 , 32 . These verses have features in cOmmon with Ezekiel which pointto their composition or atleastinterpolationunderhisinflUence. The description of the attack by Gog and his hordes on the defenceless Israelites, ' that are at quiet, that dwell securely, all of them dwelling without walls, and having neither bars nor gates ' (Ezek. xxxviii. 11), is before the writer's mind, and there are other points of contact between the passages, Cf. also Judg. xviii, 7, 10, 27, 28. The exhortation is addressed to the enemy. 32. them . . ¦ polled ; cf. ix, 26, xxv. 23. 252 JEREMIAH 49. 33, 34- SJ 33 Lord. And Hazor shall be a dwelling place of jackals, a desolation for ever : no man shall dwell there, neither shall any son of man sojourn therein. 34 [J-] The word of -the Lord that cametp Jeremiah the prophet concerning Elam in the beginningof the reign of 33, Cf. ix. n, x. 22 for the former part of the verse; xlix. 18 for the latter. 'i' xlix. 34-39. Oracle on; Ei,am. - ,-,;, Elam was a country-lying to the east -of, South Babylonia and the Lower Tigris, later known as Susiaria^ and roughly .identical with the country now called Chuzistan. That Jeremiah should devote an oracle to a country so distant and remote from Jewish interests has , seemed .to many scholars injprobable ; and even Rothstein rejects its authenticity. ' Kflberle, however, who judges the prophecies ' on 'the nations' less favourably than Rothstein, accepts it ; and Cornill accepts, a genuine nucleus, which was,- he believes, expanded when the Elamites were identified with the Persians. Giesebrecht and Schmidt think the whole was written under the Persian rule,; the, latter supposes that it was written at the ,approach of Alexander, the hatred of Persia wtiiqh it breathes being occasioned by the sufferings of the Jews at the hands of Oohus. But if the oracle , is entirely spurious, it is very .strarige that a special date should be assigned to it, since we'sjiquid have expected it to.be dated, with, the .others in the fourfh^year of Jehoiakim. And the altered conditions at this date are favourable to the authenticity. Elam was distant from Judaea, but it was near to Babylon. And with Jehoiachin a targe, number of Jews had gone to Babylon, and they kept up a close and constant corre spondence with Judaea. For thenjthe fate, of Elam would have an interest it could not have possessed before, the deportation. At a later time Ezekiel refers to the overthrow of Elam,, here it is anticipated;. It hasbeen argued that the overthrow was actually effected by the Persian king , Teispes, the great-grandfather of Cyrus. Cornill thinks that, Jeremiah's interest may have been due to a presentiment that the power which had laid-Elam low might be the destined conqueror of Babylon, as indeed proved to be the xlix. 34-39. Jeremiah's prophecy on Elam at the beginning of Zedekiah's reign. Elam's bow shall be broken, and the Elamites shall be scattered to the four winds among all nations. Elam shall be dismayed before its enemies, and the sword shall consume them. Yet it shall be restored in the latter days. JEREMIAH 49. 35— 50. i. JSJS 253 Zedekiah king of Judah, saying, Thus saith the Lord 35 of hosts : Behold, I will break the bow of Elam, the chief of their might. [Sj And upon Elam will I bring the four 36 winds from the four quarters of heaven, and will scatter them toward all those winds ; and there shall be no nation whither a the outcasts of Elam shall not come, [j] And 37 I will cause Elam to be dismayed before their enemies, and before them that seek their life : and I will bring evil iipon them, even my fierce anger, saith the Lord ; and I will send the sword after them, till I have consumed them : and I will set my throne in Elam, and will destroy 38 from thence king and princes, saith the Lord. But it 39 shall come to pass in the latter days, that I will bring again the captivity of Elam, saith the Lord. [s] The word that the Lord spake concerning Babylon, 50 * Another reading is, the everlasting outcasts. xlix. 35. The Elamites were famous archers : cf. Isa. xxii. 6. A similar expression, however, is used with reference to Israel in Hos. i. 5. 36. Cornill regards this as a later insertion. The expression to ' scatter them toward all those winds ' is characteristic of Ezekiel (Ezek. v. 10, 12, xii. 14), and the opening of the verse recalls Ezek. xxxvii. 9, and if there is dependence, Ezekiel is obviously the original. The. latter point can hardly be pressed. It is, how ever, strange to read 37 after 36. After the prophecy that Elam will be scattered by the four winds to every nation under heaven, we do not expect to read that it will be dismayed before its enemies. Verse 37 fits well to 35, and the progress of thought is interrupted by 36. 38. Yahweh sets His throne in Elam in order to judge it. 1. 1 — li. 58. Oracle on Babylon. That in a series of oracles on the nations Jeremiah should include a prophecy of Babylon's overthrow ought to occasion no surprise. Although he saw "in Babylon the agent of Yahweh's judgement on Judah and other nations, he predicted that its empire would "fall in seventy years. Moreover, that such an oracle was composed by him is attested by the narrative in li. 59-64, if 254 JEREMIAH 50. i. S concerning the land of the Chaldeans, by Jeremiah the prophet. its historicity can be accepted. Nevertheless it is an almost uni versally accepted result of criticism that 1. i— li. 58 cannot be the work of Jeremiah: This view was put forward by Eichhorn, and in spite of opposition from several scholars, notably Graf, it has been more and more adopted, Orelli constituting the chief excep tion at the present day. To this result Kuenen and especially Budde have been the foremost contributors. According to li. 59-64, the oracle belongs to the fourth year of Zedekiah. It does not belong to the oracles on the foreign nations published in the reign of Jehoiakim, so that its authenticity is not supported by these. It is distinguished from these also by its immense length. It con tains 103 verses : that on Moab, which approaches it most nearly, contains forty-seven verses. It is noteworthy for its frequent repetitions. Budde reckons that the approach of desolation is mentioned eleven times ; the capture and destruction of Babylon nine times ; Israel's fliglit and return to Palestine seven times ; and other themes are similarly the subject of repeated reference. Such a feature is quite unexampled in Jeremiah's prophecies. Looking at it still from the literary standpoint the relationship with other writings is very close. The fact that characteristic expressions of the Book of Jeremiah are present in large propor tions might be urged in favour of its authenticity ; but what was possible to Graf with his acceptance of almost the whole of the book as Jeremiah's, is no longer possible to those who recognize that not a little is secondary, and that our chapters have affinity with these as well as with the genuine passages. Moreover it betrays the same relationship to other and later writings from Ezekiel onwards, in particular to the later sections of the Book of Isaiah. The situation reflected in the oracle is not that of Zede- kiah's fourth year. Israel and Judah are in exile (1. 4, 5, 8, 19, s8> 33* "• 34i 45) 5 fche Temple has been violated by the Baby lonians (1. 28, li. 11, 51). It is true that the captivity of Israel had happened long before, and that a large body of Jews had been deported with Jehoiachin, together with Temple vessels. But the language suggests that a much more drastic fate had fallen on city and people.' It can hardly be satisfied by anything short of the catastrophe of 586. And since the writer anticipates that the over throw of Babylon is near at hand, he cannot be identified with Jeremiah who expected its empire to last for seventy years. Nor is the attitude to practical issues the same. Jeremiah^in prospect of the long captivity, calms the excitement of the exiles and bids them acquiesce in their lot and pray for the peace of Babylon; the author of this prophecy anticipates its speedy downfall, and JEREMIAH 50. 2. S 255 Declare ye among the nations and publish, and set 2 up a standard ; publish, and conceal not : say, Babylon is taken, Bel is put to shame, Merodach is a dismayed ; 0 Or, broken down excites the Jews with predictions of their approaching deliverance. And while the prophet believed that Babylon's time also would come, he betrays no exultation such as is so strongly expressed in this prophecy, nor any bitter, vindictive feelings for the wrongs inflicted on Judah. He looked on the Chaldeans as Yahweh's agents of chastisement for His people ; our author sees in their overthrow Yahweh's vengeance for the judgement they have executed. Since we have reason to suppose that Jeremiah wrote an oracle announcing the fate of Babylon, it is not impossible that it has been preserved in our prophecy. The earlier attempts by Movers and Hitzig to extract a genuine nucleus have met with no accept ance. But, with the example of the other oracles, it is by no means arbitrary to suppose that our prophecy may have grown up about a genuine kernel, as Rothstein believes. This cannot, however, be pointed out with any confidence ; and, even if it exists, can form only a very small proportion of the whole. The most obvious suggestion as to the date is that it belongs to the period immediately preceding the capture of Babylon by Cyrus in 538, that of Isa. xiii. 1 — xiv. 23, and Isa. xl-lv. But its affinity with these and later writings makes such a date improb able, since it seems generally to be secondary rather than original. It would be a mistake to regard it as a purely literary production concerned with a dead issue. Babylon was not destroyed by Cyrus, but remained for several generations, its continued existence a perplexity to those who read the earlier prophecies of its utter ruin. To such perplexity our oracle seeks to give an answer. In view of the numerous repetitions and the absence of any ordered development of the theme, it wOuld be unprofitable to prefix the usual analysis to the annotations. 1. 2. It is remarkable how much repetition there is in this verse ; ' publish,' ' put to shame,' ' dismayed,' are each repeated. But we should perhaps omit, with the LXX, 'and set up a standard; publish ; ' the setting up of the standard is not suitable here, and seems to be a gloss borrowed from Isa. xiii. 2, this chapter having several points of contact with our oracle. Bel: properly an appellative, meaning 'lord,' but used also as a proper name. Bel came to be identified with Merodach, i.e. Marduk the chief god of Babylon. Here they seem to be distin- 256 JEREMIAH 50. 3-6. S her images are put to shame, her idols are a dismayed. 3 For out of the north there cometh up a nation against her, which shall make her land desolate, and none shall dwell therein : they are fled, they aire gone, both man and 4 beast- In those days, and in that time, saith the^LoRD, the children of Israel shall come, they and the children of Judah together; they shall go on their way weeping, 5 and shall seek the Lord their God. They shall inquire concerning Zioii with their faces b thitherward, saying, Come ye, and cjoin yourselves to the Lord in an ever lasting covenant that shall not be forgotten. 6 My people. hath been lost sheep: their shepherds have a Or, broken down b ¦[ Heb. hitherward. ¦1. c Or, they shall join themselves guished. The gods of Babylon are putto confusion by the inevitable disaster that has overtaken their city. idols : or ' idol blocks.' This contemptuous term is a favourite one with Ezekiel. 3. Cf. iv. 6, 7, 25. Jeremiah's characteristic ' out of the north,' applied to the Scythians and then the Babylonians, is here borrowed to describe the foe who is to destroy Babylon. It suits the Medes better than the Persians ; but the north had a suggestion of mystery, and the mention of it heightens the terror. For the close of the verse cf. ix. 10. 4, 5. In these beautiful verses the author takes up the ideas of the reunion Of Israel in their return to Zion, and of their penitence for their sin. Cf. iii. 12, 13, 18, 21-25, xxiii. 6, xxxi. 1, 9,. 18, 19, xxxiii. 7. 5. thitherward. The literal rendering ' hitherward J should have been substituted ; the author was accordingly resident in Palestine. everlasting' covenant : cf. xxxii, 40. 6. The verse describes the evil condition of the people, the shepherds who should have guided them aright have fed them astray. The Hebrew text is uncertain, the renderingiin the E.V. follows the Hebrew margin and the LXX. The consonantal text is generally rendered ' on the seducing, mountains,' but ' apostate ' would he a more accurate rendering than 'seducing.' There might be a reference to the high-places. It would be better to accept the rendering, 'they have turned them away on the JEREMIAH 50. 7-9. S 257 caused them to go astray, they have turned them away on the mountains : they have gone from mountain to hill, they have forgotten their resting place. All that found 1 them have devoured them: and their adversaries said, We offend not, because they have sinned against the Lord, the habitation of justice, even the Lord, the hope of their fathers. Flee out of the midst of Babylon, and 8 go forth out of the land of the Chaldeans, and be as the he-goats before the flocks. For, lo, I will stir up and 9 cause to come up against Babylon an assembly of great nations from the north country : and they shall set them selves in array against herefrom thence she shall be mountains.' Some think that this refers to the worship at the high-places, on the ground that the mountains afford a suitable pasturage for sheep. But this introduces a prosaic touch into the metaphor. The meaning is that instead of being kept in the green pastures, beside the still waters, they have been sent out on the bleak mountains, where grass is scarce, where movement is diffi cult and sometimes dangerous, and where they can easily be lost. They wander from mountain to mountain, vainly seeking to better their lot, and cannot find their way back to the pastures from which they have strayed. Cf. xxiii. 1 ff., Ezek. xxxiv. 7. The verse is an echo of ii. 3, where we read ' all that devour him shall be held guilty .' Here Israel's enemies devour him, and say 'We are not guilty,' as their words should be rendered to retain the correspondence with ii. 3. Cf. also Zech. xi. 5, which apparently imitates our passage. the habitation of justice. This description of Yahweh as 'the homestead of righteousness' is peculiar, and apparently due to a misunderstanding of xxxi. 23, where in the Hebrew the words immediately follow, though they do not stand in apposition to 'Yahweh,' but are a designation of Jerusalem. even the LOED. The words are very awkward in the Hebrew, and should be omitted, with the LXX. 8. The writer exhorts the Jews to leave Babylon in haste, echoing Isa. xlviih 20 ; but he employs an original metaphor. As the he-goats push to the front to pass through the. gate when it is opened, before the rest of the flock, so let the Jews be the first to leave* other peoples will follow their example. ..'.<. 9. The reason for the exhortation to escape with speed ; the northern nations are being incited to attack Babylon. II S 258 JEREMIAH 50. 10-13. S taken : their arrows shall be as of a an expert mighty man ; 10 b none shall return in vain. And Chaldea shall be a spoil : 1 1 all that spoil her shall be satisfied, saith the Lord. Because ye are glad, because ye rejoice, O ye that plunder mine heritage, because ye are wanton as an heifer ° that treadeth 1 a out i the corn, and neigh as strong horses ; your mother shall'be sore ashamed ; she that bare you shall be con founded : behold, she shall be the hindermost of the 13 nations, a wilderness, a dry land, and a desert. Because a Or, -according to1 another reading, a mighty man that maketh childless b fOr, that retumeth not c fOr, at grass expert mighty man. This is preferable to the margin, which presupposes a slightly different vocalization. none ... in vain': i.e. the arrows all strike their mark. But since arrows do not ' return' as the sword does, after doing execu tion, to its sheath (2 Sam. i. 22), it is better to adopt the margin, taking the reference to be to the warrior, but rendering * that re tumeth not empty,' i. e. the warrior wins great spoil, as the next verse says. 11. Because: This rendering yields the sense that the punish ment on Babylon described in 12. is due to the exultation of the Babylonians over the spoiling of jjudah. But it is better to render 'Though,' i.e. in spite of their affluence and luxury they shall be brought low. There is a suggestion that the wealth which makes their riotous living possible is gained by plunder of other nations, Israel of course being singled out for special mention. that treadeth out the corn. This follows the punctuation of the Hebrew text; the meaning is that the cattle engaged in threshing could eat their fill since they were unmuzzled (Deut. xxv. 4), and, as we see clearly from Hos. x. 11, the work of tread ing out the corn was pleasanter than ploughing with a rider on the back. The marginal rendering is that of the LXX and Vulgate ; it presupposes a slightly different punctuation. The verb rendered ' yfe are wanton ' occurs also in Mai. iii. 20 (E. V. iv. 2), ' and gambol as calves of the stall.' It suits calves better than an heifer, and we should probably slightly alter the Hebrew and read ' as calves at grass,' which' isf presupposed by the LXX. For 'neigh' cf. v. 8, where, however, it is metaphorical. •_12. your mother i i. e. Babylon: the city is regarded as mother of the inhabitants. . a wilderness . . . desert : cf. ii. 6, li. 43. 13. See xviii. 16, xix. 8, xxv. 9, ii, xlix. 17. JEREMIAH 50. 14-18. S 259 of the wrath of the Lord it shall not be inhabited, but it shall be wholly desolate : every one that goeth by Babylon shall be astonished, and hiss at all her plagues. Set 14 yourselves in array against Babylon round about, all ye that bend the bow ; shoot at her, spare no arrows : for she hath sinned against the Lord. Shout against her 15 round about ; she hath » submitted herself; her bulwarks are fallen, her walls are thrown down : for it is the vengeance of the Lord ; take vengeance upon her ; as she hath done, do unto her. Cut off the sower from Babylon, 16 and him that handleth the sickle in the time of harvest : for fear of the oppressing sword they shall turn every one to his people, and they shall flee every one to his own land. i Israel is a scattered sheep; the lions have driven him 17 away : first the king of Assyria hath devoured him ; and last this Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon hath broken his bones. Therefore thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God 18 a Heb. given her hand. 14. Once more the foe is incited against Babylon : cf. 9, where also the arrows are specially mentioned ; cf. Isa. xiii. 18. 15. submitted herself : probably the correct sense ; the margin gives the literal rendering. bulwarks. The word occurs here only ; its sense is disputed, but the R.V. is probably right in the main. IB. Agriculture is at an end in Babylonia, and the foreign resi dents flee back to their country for fear of the foe (Isa. xiii. 14). The two halves of the verse seem to have no connexion. 17. sheep. The term is probably collective. Cf. <5, but here the point is not simply that the flock has lost its way, but that it has fallen a victim to the lions. Assyria devoured the flesh, and then, to consummate the destruction, Babylon has gnawed the bones. The reference is to the captivity of the Ten Tribes and the. oppression of Judah by Assyria, and the deportation of Judah to Babylon. 18. This verse certainly suggests that the Babylonian empire had not been overthrown; Still the date of the prophecy cannot be settled on this ground ; it is written from Jeremiah's stand point. S 2 260 JEREMIAH 50. 19-24- s of Israel : Behold, I will punish the king of Babylon and 19 his land, as I have punished the king of Assyria. And I will bring Israel again to his a pasture, and he shall feed on Carmel and Bashan, and his soul shall be satisfied upon 20 the hills of Ephraim and in Gilead. In those days, and in that time, saith the Lord, the iniquity of Israel shall be sought for, and there, shall be none ; and the sins of Judah, and they shall not be found : for I will pardon them whom I leave as a remnant. 21 Go up against the land of b Merathaim, even against it, and against the inhabitants of ° Pekod : slay and d utterly destroy after them, saith the Lord, and do according to all 22 that I have commanded thee. A sound of battle is in 23 the land, and of great destruction. How is the hammer of the whole earth cut asunder and broken! how is 24 Babylon become a desolation among the nations ! I have » Or, fold * That is, Double rebellion. " That is, Visitation. *? Heb. devote. 19. Cf. Mic. vii. 14. Israel is brought back from the death described in 17, and returns to its own ' homestead,' i. e. Palestine, where it finds abundant sustenance on the richest pastures. 20. Cf. xxxi. 34, Mic. vii. 18. 21. Merathaim: probably Mat Marratim, i. e. South Babylonia, but vocalized in this way in the Hebrew to suggest the sense ' Double rebellion ' (or possibly ' Double bitterness '). ?' Double ' is probably simply an intensive, implying that the land had been exceptionally rebellious, not that it had been rebellious in two" different ways. No people is named as the instrument of ven geance ; Giesebrecht suggests 'Elam' in place of the awkward ' even against it' {'aleyha). Pekod similarly suggests the sense ' Visitation ' or ' Punish ment.' It is the name of a Babylonian people, the Pukudu ; cf. Ezek. xxiii. 23. after them is rather strange ; it is omitted in the LXX, and may be due to dittography. But we might, with a slight altera tion, read ' the residue of them ' (so Giesebrecht). 23. the hammer : cf. li. 20-23. Cf. Charles Martel ; some would add Judas Maccabaeus, though the connexion of the latter word with the Hebrew word for ' hammer ' is questionable. JEREMIAH 50. 25-29. S 261 laid a snare for thee, and thou art also taken, O Babylon, and thou wast not aware : thou art found, and also caught, because thou hast striven against the Lord. The Lord 25 hath opened his armoury, and hath brought forth the weapons of his indignation: for the Lord, the Lord of hosts, hath a work to do in the land of the Chaldeans. Come against her afrom the utmost border.openher b store- 26 houses: cast her up as heaps, and "destroy her utterly : let nothing of her be left. Slay all her bullocks ; let them 27 go down to the slaughter : woe unto them ! for their day is come, the time of their visitation. The voice of them 28 that flee and escape out of the land of Babylon, to declare in Zion the vengeance of the Lord our God, the vengeance of his temple. Call together dthe archers against Babylon, 29 all them that bend the bow; camp against her round about; let none thereof escape : recompense her according to her work ; according to all that she hath done, do unto her : for she hath been proud against the Lord, against * "fOr, from every quarter b +Or, granaries 0 Heb. devote her. d Or, many 26. The spoilers are invited to come from every quarter, to open her granaries. The following clause ' cast her up as heaps ' is difficult ; the meaning is taken to be as heaps of corn, but the contents of the granaries are not cast up as heaps of corn, since they are heaps of corn. Cornill follows Aquila in reading 'as heapers up ' (of sheaves). The mention of ' devotion,' i. e. the ban, in the next clause, shows that Deut. xiii. 16 is in the writer's mind, according to which an idolatrous city is to be placed under the ban, its inhabitants and cattle destroyed, and all its spoil heaped up in the midst of the street and consumed by fire. ,j - 27. bullocks: figurative for her young warriors rather than her magnates : cf. Isa. xxxiv. 7, 28. Zion is in existence at the time. The closing words, ' the Vengeance of the Temple,' mean the vengeance for its destruction by Nebuchadnezzar. They may have been inserted here from li. 11, since they are absent in the LXX. 29. For the archers cf. 14, and for the close of the verse Isa. xxxvii. 23. 262 JEREMIAH 50. 30-36. S. 30 the Holy One of Israel. Therefore shall her young men fall in her streets, and all 'her men of war shall be brought 31 to silence in that day, saith the Lord. Behold, I am against thee, aO thou proud one, saith the Lord, the Lord of hosts : for thy day is come, the time that I will 32 visit thee. And bthe proud one shall stumble and fall, and none shall raise him up : and I will kindle a fire in his cities, and it shall devour all that are round about him. - 33 Thus saith the Lord of hosts : The children of Israel and the children of Judah are oppressed together: and all that took them captives hold them fast ;' they refuse 34 to let them go. Their redeemer is strong ; the Lord of hosts is his name : he shall throughly plead their cause, that he may give rest to the earth, and disquiet the inhabi ts tants of Babylon. A sword is upon the Chaldeans, saith the Lord, and upon the inhabitants of Babylon, and upon 36 her princes, and. upon her wise men. A sword is upon - fHeb. O Pride. b +Heb. Pride. 30. See xlix. 26, from which it is repeated. Graf took it to be a quotation written on the margin here, and mistakenly inserted in the text ; but his view is not generally accepted. 31, 32. The margins would perhaps have been better : 'Pride' is used as a proper name for Babylon, here and' in the. next verse. In these verses xxi. 13, 14 are clearly before the writer's mind. For the close of 31 cf. 27b, for 32*. cf; Amos v. 2. 33. The association of the northern tribes with Judah is curious, since it was the, Assyrians who carried away the former into cap tivity. For the close of the verse cf. Isa. xiv. 17. 34. The earth is to be at peace by the discomfiture of the Baby lonians who have so long disturbed its rest: cf. Isa. xiv. 5-8, 16. Their redeemer is strong : cf. Prov. xxiii. 11 ; Isa. xliii. 14, xlvii. 4. 35. We should perhaps Tender ' Sword, be upon the Chaldeans !' and similarly throughout the passage. 36. boasters. The reference is generally taken to be to the lying prophets and diviners. P. Haupt, with a slight correction, reads a Babylonian word meaning 'diviners.' JEREMIAH 50. 37-40. S 263 the a boasters, and they shall dote : a sword is upon, her mighty men, and they shall be dismayed. A sword is 37 upon their horses, and upon their chariots, and upon all . the mingled people that are in the midst of her, and they shall become as women : a sword is upon her treasures, and they shall be robbed. A drought is upon her waters, 3S and they shall be dried up : for it is a land of graven images, and they are mad upon b idols. ° Therefore the 39 wild beasts of the desert with the dwolves shall dwell there, and the ostriches shall dwell therein : and it shall be no more inhabited for ever ; neither shall it be dwelt in from generation to generation. As when G od overthrew Sodom 4° and Gomorrah and the neighbour cities thereof, saith the Lord ; so shall no man dwell there, neither shall any son * Heb. boastings. b Heb. terrors. c See Isa. xiii. si; 22 a Heb. howling creatures. _>¦ 37. the mingled people : see xxv. 20. Generally it is thought that foreign soldiers hired by Babylon are intended. Cheyne thinks of ' the Arabian population in Babylonia ' {Enc. Bib. 3099). 1 38. drought. The word in the unpointed text is the same as that used for ' sword ' in the rest of the passage ; and we should probably render it ' sword ' here. The present pointing seems to be due to the feeling that ' sword ' was incongruous in this context, whereas 'drought' was suitable. But the words are not to be pressed with prosaic literalism ; and the symmetry of the passage is disturbed if ' drought ' is substituted for ' sword.' and they are mad upon idols : rather ' and with idols do they make themselves mad ; ' but the Versions read, with different point ing, ' and they boast themselves of idols,' as in Ps. xcvii. 7. The ' idols ' are properly 'Terrors,* the hideous figures worshipped by the people. 39, 40l Now follows a passage which, like Isa. xxxiv. 9-17, is based on Isa. xiii. 19-22. The second verse is practically identi cal with xlix. 18, The ruins of a city are to this day avoided by the Bedawin, who believe that they are the haunt not of wild animals alone but of uncanny creatures. In this passage the latter seem to be absent. ' The wild beasts of the desert' may be the correct rendering ; some translate ' wild cats ' (so Bochart). For ' wolves ' some prefer ' jackals.' 264 JEREMIAH 50. 4i— 51. i. S 41 of man sojourn therein. a Behold, a people cometh from the- north; and a great nation, and many kings shall be 43 stirred up from the uttermost parts of the earth.,; They lay hold on bow and spear; they are cruel, and have no mercy; their voice roareth like the sea, and they ride upon horses ; every one set in array, as a man to the 43 battle, against thee, O daughter of Babylon. The king of Babylon hath heard the fame of them, and his hands wax feeble : anguish hath taken hold of him, and pangs 44 as of a woman in travail. b Behold, he shall come up like a lion from the pride of Jordan against the strong habitation : but I will suddenly make them run away from her ; and whoso is chosen, him will I appoint over her : for who is like me? and who will appoint me a time? and who is the shepherd that will stand before me? 45 Therefore hear ye the counsel of the Lord, that he hath taken against Babylon ; and his purposes, that he hath purposed against the land of the Chaldeans : Surely they shall drag them away, even the little ones Of the flock.; surely he shall make their habitation desolate with them. 46 At the noise of the taking of Babylon the earth trembleth, and the cry is heard among the nations. 51 Thus saith the Lord : Behold, I will raise up against a See ch. vi. 22-24. b See ch. xlix. 19-21. 41-43. These verses are copied, with trifling alterations and necessary adjustment to Babylon, from vi. 22-24. 44-46. These verses are taken from xlix. 19-21, with necessary changes due to the change in reference from Edom to Babylon and some other alterations. See the notes on that passage. 46. among the nations.' The noise of Edom's fall is heard in the Red Sea ; that of Babylon's fall 'among the nations.' ,<£' 1". tebkamai- The meaning is explained in the margin ( heart means/ centre ' ) ; the cypher is Atbash, for which see notes on xxv. 26. Since the LXX read ' Kasdim,' i, e. Chaldea, it is JEREMIAH 51. 2-5. S 265 Babylon, and against them that dwell in aLeb-kamai, a destroying wind. And I will send unto Babylon 2 b strangers, that shall fan her ; and they shall empty her land : for in the day of trouble they shall be against her round about. ° Let not the archer bend his bow, and let 3 him not lift himself up in his coat of mail : and spare ye not her young men ; d destroy ye utterly all her host. And they shall fall down slain in the land of the Chaldeans, 4 and thrust through in her streets. For Israel is not 5 a That is, The heart of them that rise up against me. According to ancient tradition, a cypher for Casdim, that is, Chaldea. b + Or, fanners c Or, as otherwise read, Against him that bendeth let the archer bend his bow, and against him that lifteth himself up &c. d Heb. devote ye all &c. probable that this was the original text, and that the substitution of • Leb-kamai ' originated in an ingenious marginal gloss. a destroying wind. A comparison with n suggests that we should render, with most recent scholars, ' the spirit ofadestroyer.' 2. strangers. The margin ' fanners ' is better, since the noun thus corresponds with the verb, and this sense, which requires simply a slight change in the pointing, is adopted by the Syriac and Vulgate. The metaphor is taken from the winnowing of corn. 3. The text is uncertain and probably corrupt. The rendering in R.V. text is preferable to that in the margin ; the meaning is, Let the armies of Babylon make no resistance to the enemy. But this does not suit the latter part of the verse, where the enemy is addressed. Various suggestions have been made to cure the cor ruption ; none is quite satisfactory. The simplest is that of Cornill, that the negatives should be omitted ; the words will then have reference to the assault of the enemy on Babylon: It is of course a precarious emendation, though supported by the LXX. 4. Cf. Isa. xiii. 15, Ezek. xxviii. 23, Lam. iv. 9^ 5. This is a difficult verse ; Graf thought that it must have been inserted by another hand, on account of the lack Of connexion with the context. The word rendered 'forsaken' is literally ' widowed ' (cf. Isa. liv. 4) ; but strangely the masculine is used, whereas elsewhere Yahweh is the husband, Israel the wife. The second half of the verse is also difficult. By ' their land it seems as if the land of Israel and Judah is meant, the sense being that Yahweh has not forsaken them though their guilt might well have caused Him to do so. But the Hebrew, especially in view of 1. 29, 266 JEREMIAH 51.6,?. S forsaken, nor Judah, of his God, of the Lord of hosts; though their land is full of guilt against the Holy One of 6 Israel. Flee out of the midst of Babylon, and save every man his life ; be not cut off in her iniquity : for it is the time of tbe Lord's vengeance ; he will render unto her 7 a recompence. Babylon hath been a golden cup in the Lord's hand, that made all the earth drunken: the nations have drunk of her wine ; therefore the nations are mad. favours the reference to Babylonia, and we should in that case substitute 'but' for ',' though.' If, however, 'their land' means Babylonia, the two halves of the verse seem to be in their wrong order, and 5b should follow 4, and the word rendered ,' though ' should bear its usual sense 'for' (so Cornill). Verse 5* still remains somewhat isolated ; Cornill thinks that a couplet has fallen out after it, and suggests that it may have run as in Isa. liv. 5, ' But his creator is his husband, and his redeemer, the Holy One of Israel.' ' ; 6. The people to whom this is addressed are not named ; they might be the foreign residents generally, but a reference to 45, where the verse is largely repeated, favours the view that the Jews are intended, as in 1. 6 and the Deutero-Isaianic parallels Isa. xlviii: 20, Iii. 12. The reason for flight is that they may not be involved in the overthrow of Babylon : cf. Rev. xviii. 4. For the latter part of the verse cf. I. 15, Isa. xxxiv. 8, lix. 18, lxiii. 4, 7. The passage recalls the vision of the cup in xxv. But the resemblance is superficial. There the cup was that of Yahweh's fury. Babylon might no doubt be called a cup in Yahweh's hand, in .the sense that she was His instrument in the execution of judge ment, just as Assyria was the rod of His anger (Isa. x. 5). But here. the idea is rather of her luxury and sinfulness, which have exerted a baneful influence on the nations. The thought is there fore quite parallel to that in Rev. xvii. 4, which is based on this passage, and Nah. iii. 4. Only we should, omit ' in the Lord's hand ' as an insertion under the influence of xxv. 15, 16 ; since Yahweh can hardly have been represented as using Babylon to demoralize the nations. The epithet 'golden,' on the other hand, is not to be struck out on the ground that a metal cup is not broken by a fall (8). It is deliberately introduced to suggest the seductive luxury of Babylon, and the subject in 8 is ' Babylon ' ; the meta phor of the cups is still in the author's mind, but:by substitutingthe literal for, the figurative, he ayoids the incongruity of representing the golden cup as broken. JEREMIAH 51. 8-n. S 267 Babylon is suddenly fallen and destroyed : howl for her ; 8 take balm for her pain, if so be she may be healed. We 9 would have healed Babylon, but she is not healed: forsake her, and let us go every one into his own country : for her judgement reacheth unto heaven, and is lifted up even to the skies. The LOrd hath brought forth our righteousness : 10 come, and let us declare in Zion the work of the Lord our God. Make a sharp the arrows; ^hold firm. the 11 "tOr, bright Heb. clean. b Heb. fill. 8. The opening of the verse is derived from Isa. xxi. 9. The latter part introduces a new metaphor indicating Babylon's desperate condition: cf. viii. 22, xxx. 12, 13, and especially xlvi. 11. The words are not spoken with sympathy but with triumphant irony. 9. Since the speakers in 10 are the Jews, it is natural to sup pose that they are the speakers in this verse. But then we have the strange assertion at the beginning of the verse that they would have healed Babylon, which is quite irreconcilable with the attitude of the Jewish captives. , Nor do the words 'let us go every one into his own country ' suit the Jews, but must be spoken by exiles from different countries. To strike out the clause or part of it is arbitrary. We must then assume that the speakers are foreign residents in Babylon and presumably not captives, since the latter would hail the downfall of the oppressor. They answer the ironical invitation at the end of 8. They have been able to find no cure, and must abandon her to her fate, since her guilt and her punishment mount to the skies. 10. If the view taken in the preceding note is correct, this verse cannot continue the utterance in 9, in spite of the apparent links between the two — the contrast between ' her judgement ' and ' our righteousness,' and the parallel between ' forsake her, and let us go ' and ' come, and let us declare.' The first clause means that Yahweh has vindicated the Jews, put them in the right, by the overthrow of Babylon. 11. The exhortations in this verse and the next are addressed to the enemy. The first clause comes in strangely, the second clause carries on the thought of 10, while the first clause would be more in place in connexion with the other preparations for conflict mentioned in 12, or in 27 to which Cornill transfers it. The arrows are to be polished (cf. Isa! xlix., 2), so that they may pierce their victims more easily. The rendering ' hold firm (he shields ' is dubious. The verb, as the margin says, means '.fill,' so that the 268 JEREMIAH 51. 12-14. S a shields : the Lord hath stirred up the spirit of the kings of the Medes ; because his device is against Babylon, to destroy it: for it is the vengeance of the Lord, theiven- 12 geance of his templet Set up a standard against the walls of Babylon, make the watch strong, set the watchmen, prepare the ambushes : for the Lord hath both devised and done that which he spake concerning the inhabitants 13 of Babylon. O thou that dwellest upon many waters, abundant in treasures, thine end is come, the measure of 14 thy b covetousness. The Lord of hosts hath sworn by a Or, suits of armour b Or, dishonest gain sense is rather ' gird the shields closely to you.' Giesebrecht reads a verb meaning to ' scout" or 'polish ' {mirtu). Rothstein suggests 'anoint' (cf. 2 Sam. i. 21). But the translation ' shields' is not certain ; W. E. Barnes argues in detail for the meaning ' armour ' or ' equipment ' {Expository Times, x. 43-45) ; if his reasoning is sound the margin 'suits of armour' should be adopted, and no emendation of the verb is required. the kings of the Biedes. The LXX reading, ' the king of the Medes ' should be substituted. The reference to the Medes seems to have been suggested by Isa. xiii. 17. for it is... temple! see on I. 28 ; cf. xlvi. 10, 1. 15; Isa.xxxiv.8. 12. Exhortation to begin the blockade of Babylon and set am buscades, not merely to intercept any who ventured out of the city, or to cut off stragglers after a sOrtie, but to take advantage of a sortie to push through the gates (cf. Joshua viii. 12-19, Judges xx. 29-40). The ' watchmen ' are not those who are placed On the alert to see what happens, but those who guard the city closely. 13. many waters: cf. 1. 38, Rev. xvii. 1, Ps. cxxxvii. r. The Euphrates, the numerous canals, and the pools (cf. 32 marg.) gave the Babylonians a sense of their security; as their rocky fastnesses gave Edom (xlix. 16), and the Nile and the canals gave No-Amon (Nah, iii. 8). ' ' . the measure of thy covetonsness. This clause has occa sioned much discussion'; the Word rendered 'measure' means 'cubit;' while that rendered 'covetousness' also means 'cutting off. The sense is that the prescribed limit of Babylon's existence has been reached, and it will now be cut off. The metaphor is taken from weaving, and is best illustrated by Isa. xxxviii. 12. 14. Cf. Amos vi. 8. The sense of the R.V. is that Yahweh will certainly fill Babylon with enemies as numerous, rapacious, and destructive as locusts. Another view is that we should translate JEREMIAH 51. r5-3o. S 269 himself, saying, Surely I will fill thee with men, as with the cankerworm ; and they shall lift up a shout against thee. a He hath made the earth by his power, he hath esta- rS blished the world by his wisdom, and by his understanding hath he stretched out the heavens : when he uttereth his 16 voice, there is a tumult of waters in the heavens, and he causeth the vapours to ascend from the ends of the earth ; he maketh lightnings for the rain, and bringeth forth the wind out of his treasuries. Every man is become brutish 17 and is without knowledge; every goldsmith is put to shame by his graven image : for his molten image is false hood, and there is no breath in them. They are vanity, 18 a work of delusion : in the time of their visitation they shall perish. The portion of Jacob is not like these ; 19 for he is the former of all things ; and Israel is the tribe of his inheritance : the Lord of hosts is his name. Thou art my D battle axe and weapons of war : and 20 a See ch. x. 12-16. b -\Or,-maul ' though I fill thee,' and explain that, be Babylon's population mul titudinous as the locusts, the shout of triumph will yet be raised over her by her conquerors. The ' cankerworm ' seems to be the locust in its pupa stage. 15-19. These verses repeat, with very trifling difference, x. 12-16, and the notes on that passage must be consulted for the exegesis. It is difficult tp understand why it was inserted here, where it is quite irrelevant. Apparently it was introduced by some reader to substantiate the certainty that Yahweh's oath will be accomplished, by asserting His omnipotence and the impotence of idols. 20-23. In this passage, marked with similar repetition as 1. 35-38, it is not clear what power is addressed. But the argu ments that it is Babylon seem to be convincing. When the interpolation 15-19 has been removed, 20-23 connects with 13, 14, in which Babylon is addressed. Further, in 1. 23 Babylon is des cribed as ' the hammer of the whole earth,' and immediately after our passage as a ' destroying mountain . . . which destroy est all the earth ' (25). Other identifications are unsuitable, because nothing hints that there is a change in the reference of the second person. 270 JEREMIAH 51. 21-24- S with thee will I break in pieces the nations ; and with 21 thee will I destroy kingdoms ; and with thee will I break in pieces the horse and his rider; and with thee will •I break in pieces the chariot and him that rideth therein ; 22 and with thee will I break in pieces man and woman; and with thee will I break in pieces the old man and the youth ; and with thee will I break in pieces the young 23 man and the maid ; and with thee will I break in pieces the shepherd and his flock ; and with thee will I break in pieces the husbandman and his yoke of oxen ; and with thee will I break in pieces a governors and deputies. 24 Arid I will render unto Babylon and to all the inhabitants of Chaldea all their evil that they have done in Zion in your sight, saith the Lord. a Or, lieutenants The future tenses in the R.V- should be changed into presents, expressing habitual action. Verse 24 favours to some extent the other view, but is not incompatible with that adopted. 20. battle axe. The word means rather 'battle-hammer' or 'club;' 'mace' would be a good rendering. This formidable weapon was much used by the Assyrians, probably also by the Babylonians. weapons. Perhaps, with a change in punctuation, we should read the singular. 23. governors and deputies. The same combination occurs in Ezek. xxiii. 6, 12, 23; where it is rendered ' governors and rulers. ' Both words are of Assyrian origin ; the former might be rendered ' satraps,' the latter ' viceroys ' (so Lofthouse on Ezek. xxiii. 6). The use of these terms does not necessarily imply that the mace breaks the magnates of the Babyloflia/rt empire ; similar Officials might be found in other kingdoms. 24. But while' Babylon is the hammer in the hands of the Almighty, He will recompense her for her overthrow of Zion. Such a statement is out of harmony with Jeremiah's' point of view. It is true that Isaiah can speak of Assyria as the rod of Yahweh's anger, and yet announce that when Yahweh has chas tised His people with it, He will break it and fling it aside. But Assyria is not punished for its mis-handling of Judah, but for its boastfulness against Yahweh (Isa. x. 5-15). in your Bijfht: to be connected with « I will render.' JEREMIAH 51. 25-27. S 271 Behold, I am against thee, O destroying mountain, 25 saith the Lord, which destrOyest all the earth: and I will stretch out mine hand upon thee, and roll thee down from the rocks, and will make thee a burnt mountain. And they shall not take of thee a stone for 26 a corner, nor a stone for foundations ; but thou shalt be desolate for ever, saith the Lord. Set ye up a standard 27 in the land, blow the trumpet among the nations,11 prepare the nations against her, call together against her the king doms of Ararat, Minni, and Ashkenaz : appoint a mars'aal a Heb. sanctify. 25, 28. Since Babylon is situated in a plain, the reference to it as a mountain must be metaphorical ; it is so called as lifted above other countries. Whether one who was actually familiar with the country would have chosen a figurative designation which was literally so inappropriate is questionable. Probably, as Budde points out, Ezekiel's prophecy against mount Seir (Ezek. xxxv) is before the writer's mind. The phrase ' destroying mountain ' comes from 2 Kings xxiii. 13 (see R.V. margin). It is natural to think of the ' mountain ' as a volcano. But this is very questionable : the mountain is regarded as itself burnt to a cinder, rather than as belching forth fire, and therefore as yielding no stones suitable for building, the action of the fire making the stones unfit for the pur pose. The writer may have thought of the mountain as!a great mass of limestone (cf. Isa. xxxiii. 12), itself piled high upon cliffs down which it is cast. 86. The verse seems to be an imitation of Isa. xxx. 14. 27. Once more the author begins a description of the attack on Babylon. Ararat (Gen. viii. 4, 2 Kings xix. 37) is the Assyrian Urartu and the Armenian Ayrarat. It embraced part of Armenia, but the limits varied : properly it was in the northern part of Armenia, north-west of Lake Van. Minni is the cuneiform Mannai, and' is placed by some between Lake Van and Lake Urumia, by others to the south or south-east of the latter. Ashkenaz presumably in the neighbourhood of the preceding. It may be inferred from- Gen, x. 3 that they were akin to the Cimmerians: It ist often identified with the Assyrian Ashgus ; the ' n ' may be mistaken insertion in the Hebrew, or it may have been in the original word but omitted in Assyrian. marshal. The Hebrew word occurs also in Nah. iii. 17, there also in connexion with locusts. It is' generally regarded as the 272 JEREMIAH 51. 28-32. S against her; cause the horses to come up as the rough 28 cankerworm. a Prepare against her the nations, the kings of the Medes, the governors thereof, and all the deputies 29 thereof, and all the land of his dominion. And the land trembleth and is in pain : for the purposes of the Lord against Babylon do stand, to make the land of Babylon 30 a desolation, without inhabitant. The mighty men of Babylon have forborne to fight, they remain in their strong holds; their might hath failed; they are become as women: her dwelling places are set on fire; her bars 3r are broken. One post shall run to meet another, and one messenger to meet another, to shew the king of Babylon 32 that his city is taken on every quarter : and the D passages are surprised, and the c reeds they have b.urned with fire, and the men of War are affrighted. a Heb. sanctify. b Or, fords ° Or, marshes Heb. pools. Assyrian dupiarru, ' tablet-writer.' Here it might mean a scribe who had the duty of enlisting the soldiers ; but this does not suit Nah. iii. 17, where they are compared to ' swarms of grasshoppersjf nor yet the present passage, since, as Graf pointed out, the term should be taken as a collective, parallel to the collective singular rendered ' horses ' in the next clause. Some type of troop, as he says, seems to be intended. the rough cankerworm : the locust in its pupa-stage, when the wings are still enclosed in sheaths which stand out on the back. Their worst ravages are accomplished in this stage. 28. Read ' king ' for ' kings,' and ' his governors,' ' his deputies. On these terms see note on 23. 30. A vivid description of the capture of the city now follows. 31. post, or 'courier,' literally 'runner.' The couriers and newsbearers meet each other as they come from all sides to tell the king that the city is captured. 32. passages ; i. e. ferries, not fords. reeds. As the margin indicates, the word properly means 'pools,' but to say that the pools are burned is too extravagant an hyperbole. The text seems to be corrupt. Duhm suggests. ' defences,' ' barricades.' Graetz, Cheyne in the Pulpit Comment ary, and now Coste, read ' palaces.' Cornill supposes that some words have fallen out; similarly Rothstein. JEREMIAH 51. 33-36. S 273 For thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel : 33 The daughter of Babylon is like a threshing-floor at the time when it is trodden ; yet a little while, and the time of harvest shall come for her. Nebuchadrezzar the king of 34 Babylon hath devoured a me, he hath crushed a me, he hath made a me an empty vessel, he hath swallowed a me up like a dragon, he hath filled his maw with my delicates ; he hath cast ame out. bThe violence done to me and 35 to my flesh be upon Babylon, shall the c inhabitant of Zion say; and, My blood be upon the inhabitants of Chaldea, shall Jerusalem say. Therefore thus saith the 36 * Another reading is, us. b Heb. My wrong and my flesh. ° Heb. inhabitress. 33. When the harvest-time approaches, the threshing-floOr is trodden down smooth and hard, and when the corn has been reaped it is threshed upon it. The metaphor is a fine one, but is not clearly carried out At first Babylon is compared to the threshing-floor itself ; as this is trodden down flat, so it will be trampled on and levelled with the ground. A more conventional metaphor would have been to liken it to the corn on the threshing- floor trampled by oxen who draw the threshing-sledge over it : cf. Isa xxi. 10, Amos i. 3, Mic. iv. 13. This is perhaps suggested by the last clause : Babylon is like the corn which is to be reaped and then threshed. The sense of this clause, however, may be that Babylon is like a cornfield, which is soon to be reaped, stripped of all its golden splendour. But whichever view be adopted* we seem to have two metaphors combined. the time of harvest. We should perhaps read, with LXX and Syriac, 'the harvest,' or, with a slight change, 'the reaper.' 34. Israel recounts the injuries the king of Babylon has done her. The R.V. rightly prefers the singular pronoun 'me' throughout. The reference, in the ' empty vessel ' is to the loss of all which she has suffered. The king is likened to the mythical dragon, for which we may compare the designations of the world- empires in Isa. xxvii. 1. He has swallowed the people, and also the treasures it had formerly enjoyed. cast me out. This is the sense, it requires a slightly differ ent pointing ; the verb as pointed means ' rinsed me out.' 35. Cf. Gen. xvi. 5. 36. To this invocation of vengeance on Babylon, Yanwen responds with the assurance that He will avenge His people upon II I 274 JEREMIAH 51. 37-43. S Lord : Behold, I will plead thy cause, and take vengeance for thee ; and I will dry up her sea, and make her fountain 37 dry. And Babylon shall become heaps, a dwelling place for- jackals, an astonishment, and an hissing, without 38 inhabitant. They shall roar together like young lions ; 39 they shall growl as lions' whelps. When they are heated, I will make their feast, and I will make them drunken* that they may rejoice, and sleep a perpetual sleep, and 40 not wake, saith the Lord. I will bring them down like 4' lambs to the slaughter,, like rams with he-goats. How is n Sheshach taken ! and the praise of the whole earth sur prised ! how is Babylon become Da desolation among 42 the nations ! The sea is come up upon Babylon : she is 43 covered with the ° multitude of the waves thereof. Her cities are become ^a desolation, a dry land, and a desert, a See ch. xxv. 26. b Or, an astonishment ° Or, tumult her. The ' sea ' is either the Euphrates (called so like the Nile, Isa. xviii. 2, xix. 5 ; Nah. iii. 8), or the lake dug by Nebuchadnezzar. In Herodotus (I. 185) we have an account of a lake built by Nitocris. 37. Cf. ix. 11, x. 22, xviii. 16 ; Isa. xiii. 22. 38. The Babylonians are like lions growling with satisfaction over their prey : cf. Amos iii. 4, Isa. v. 29. 3S. Cf. 57. The metaphor glides from the lions feasting, to men at a banquet, who are overcome by wine and pass into the everlasting sleep When they are heated. The sense is not quite clear ; it is generally taken to be when they are hot with desire. Then Yahweh prepares their drinking-banquet. Giesebrecht reads 'when lam hot,' i. e. when my wrath burns. rejoice. This does not suit the context. The LXX rendered ' be stupefied.' This, as Giesebrecht, followed by several scholars, thinks, probably implies a Hebrew verb meaning ' to faintt' as in Isa. li. 20 {yHtlldpha)'. 40. This verse is based on Isa. xxxiv. 6, 7. 41. Sheshach: i. e. Babel : see note on xxv. 26. It is omitted in LXX and' Syriac. , 42. The sea: not the literal Euphrates, as some takeit, but the multitudinous invaders. Cf. Isa. viii. 7, 8. 43. Cf. ii, 6, 1. 12, 40. JEREMIAH 51. 44-46. S 275 a land wherein no man dwelleth, neither doth any son of man pass thereby. And I will a do judgement upon Bel! 44 in Babylon, and I will bring forth out of his mouth that which he hath swallowed up ; and the nations shall not flow together any more unto him : yea, the wall of Babylon shall fall. My people, go ye out of the midst of her, and save 45 yourselves every man from the fierce anger of the Lord. And let not your heart faint, neither fear ye for the rumour 46 that shall be heard in the land ; for a rumour shall come one year, and after that in another year shall come a rumour, * Heb. visit upon. 44. Bel (see note on 1. 2) will be compelled to disgorge what he has swallowed (see 34). This is not simply the wealth of the nations, but the nations themselves. The passage is thus parallel to the story of the swallowing and vomiting forth of Jonah by the fish, which seems to be a figurative description of the exile and return of Israel. 44b-49a. This passage (from ' yea, the wall ') is omitted in the LXX. Duhm thinks that it is a first draft of 49,J-53, which was substituted for it by the author or the editor. Verse 45 is parallel to 50, and 47 is largely . repeated in 52. Rothstein practically agrees with Duhm ; but Cornill agrees with Hitzig that the omission in the LXX was occasioned by the accidental passing from ' Babylon shall fall' in 44 to ' Babylon shall fall ' in 49. And in view of the difference between 44b-49a and 49b-53. this is the safer view to take. the wall of Babylon shall fall. This is not very appropriate in this connexion. Cornill thinks that the parallelism requires a reference to a deity, and suggests 'the Desire of Babylon shall fall,' that is, the chief goddess of Babylon ; he compares Dan. xi. 37 *the desire of women,' which seems from the context to mean a deity, pejhaps Tammuz. 45. Cf. 6 ; Isa. Iii. n. 46. The passage is difficult. The Hebrew text needs some change but the general sense is given in the R.V. Moreover the passage seems to suggest, in contrast to the general tenor of the oracle, that year after year may go by, while one magnate wars with another, and this rumour gives place to that, and the hope of deliverance seems to grow more and more remote. But we need not assume that the author expected a long period to elapse in T 2 276 JEREMIAH 51. 47-S'- S 47 and violence in the land, ruler against ruler. Therefore, behold, the. days come, that I will do judgement upon the graven images of Babylon, and her whole land shall be ashamed; and all her slain shall fall in the midst of her. 48 Then the heaven and the earth, and all that is therein, shall sing for joy over Babylon; for the spoilers shall 49 come unto her from the north, saith the Lord. a As Babylon hath caused the slain of Israel to fall, so at 50 Babylon, shall fall the slain of all the..1' land. Ye that have escaped the sword, go. ye, stand not still; re member the Lord from afar, and let Jerusalem come into 51 your mind. We are ashamed, because we have heard reproach ; confusion hath covered .our faces : for strangers a Or, Both Babylon' is to fall, O ye slain of Israel, and at &c ; b fOr, earth such struggles and rumours. Four or five years would be a brief prelude to the downfall of an empire, and yet it might be a time of racking suspense, intolerably long to live through day by day. 47. This is largely identical with 52, and on that ground deleted by Giesebrecht. ' Therefore ' is unsuitable"; we might read ' for,' the present text having arisen from assimilation to 52 and the frequency with which 'Therefore' is used with this formula. Cornill suggests 'rulers' instead of 'graven images,' which he thinks is also due to 52. It fits on to the close of 46, and the triple reference to the punishment of Babylon's gods in 44, 47, 52 is thus avoided. all her slain shall fall: i.e. her inhabitants shall, fall slain. 48. Cf. Isa. xliv. 23 ; for 48" cf. 53". 49. The text is difficult. In the former part of the verse we should render (cf. margin) ' Babel also is to fall, O ye slain of Israel.' But it would be better, repeating a consonant, to read 'forthe slain of Israel,' and continue ' As for Babel have fallen the slain of all the earth.' 50. The Jews, who have escaped death at the hands of the Babylonians, are bidden remember Yahweh and bethink themselves of Jerusalem, with the intention of returning. 51. The reply of the Jews to the exhortation in 50. They are exposed to reproach and covered with confusion, since foreigners have penetrated into the sacred places of the Temple : see note on Lam. 1. 10. JEREMIAH 51.52-58. S 277 are come into the sanctuaries of the Lord's house. Where- 5a fore, behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will do judgement upon her graven images ; and through all her land the wounded shall groan. Though Babylon 53 should mount up to heaven, and though she should fortify the height of her strength, yet from me shall .spoilers come unto her, saith the Lord. The sound of a cry from 54 Babylon, and of great destruction from the land of the Chaldeans! for the Lord spoileth Babylon, and destroyeth 55 out of her the great voice ; and their waves roar like many waters, the noise of their voice is uttered : for the spoiler 55 is come upon her, even upon Babylon, and her mighty men are taken, their bows are broken in pieces : for the Lord is a God of recompences, he shall surely requite. And I will make drunk her princes and her wise men, her 57 governors and her deputies, and her mighty men; and they shall ^sleep a perpetual sleep, and not wake, saith the King, whose name is the Lord of hbsts. Thus saith the 58 Lord of hosts : a The broad walls of Babylon shall be a Or, The walls of broad Babylon 52. Since Babylon has violated the sanctity of Yahweh's house, He will judge her idols. For 52" cf. Ezek. xxvi. 15. ' :' : B3. Cf. Isa. xiv, 12-14, Hab. ii. 9, Obad. 3 ; for 53b cf. 48b. 54. Cf. xlviii. 3, 1. 22. 55. Yahweh spoils Babylon and brings to silence all its din ; the foe sweeps into it like a great sea (cf. 42), its roar drowning the roar of the doomed city.' Cf. vi. 23, Isa. xvii. 12. 56. The former part of the verse largely repeats 48", 53° ; for the latter part cf. Isa. lix. 18. 57. This closely resembles 39 ; for ' her governors and her deputies ' cf. 23, 28. . 1 58. walls. The singular should be read, as in LXX and Vulgate, in agreement with the singular adjective. The wall of Babylon was famous in antiquity ; Herodotus says that it was ' fifty royal cubits in breadth, and in height two hundred ' (I. 178), but his statement is generally regarded as exaggerated. The fortifications were actually destroyed by Darius. 2?8 JEREMIAH 51.159- SB utterly a overthrown, and her high gates shall be burned with fire ;;b and ithe peoples, shall labour for; vanity, and the.nations for the fire ; and they shall be weary..: 59 '.. [B,] The word which Jeremiah the prophet commanded » fOr; made bare ' b See Hab. ii. 13. and, the peoples . . . weary. The text shouldr-be slightly altered, and we should read at, the end, 'and the. nations shall weary themselves for the fire.' The passage occurs, except for the interchange of 'vanity J and; f? fire,' in Hab. ii. 13. Recent scholars generally agree with Graf that in the latter, passage, it is a quotation, and that both our passage and Hab. ii. 13 are derived from the same original. The point of the quotation here is that in the overthrow of Babylon we have a fulfilment of the ancient saying. for the fire : i. e. their labour is all destined to come to nought. li. 59-64. Jeremiah Bids, Seraiah Read the Book of Babylon's Doom; and then Sink it in the Euphrates. Since in 6ob the words written by Jeremiah, which Seraiah was to read and cast in the Euphrates, are apparently identified with the preceding oracle 1. 2— li. 58, it is not unnatural that several scholars should have inferred that the story is as fictitious as the oracle itself is spurious. It is not necessary, however, to accept this identification, and Budde; followed by Cornill and Driver, argues forcibly-for the historicity of the story, regarding the oracle entrusted to Seraiah as quite distinct from that which has preceded. The reference to Seraiah is itself a strong support to H. He was the brother of Baruch, though this is 'riot emphasized as it would have been by a later writer anxious to guarantee his story ; but we learn it simply by combining the account of his ancestry with that of Baruch (xxxii. 12). It is therefore probable that Seraiah under-; took a journey to Babylon. So much is admitted by Duhm, who rejects the story as a whole. Whether Zedekiah went to Babylon at the same time is uncertain. The statement in the Hebrewtext that Seraiah was 'quartermaster' does not prove a, personal visit of the king to Babylon, though it agrees well with it, since he might have acted in this capacity for an embassy. According to the LXX, he was 'commissary of the tribute,' and went 'from Zedekiah.' In view of this uncertainty in the text we cannot feel sure that the king visited Babylon at this time. Nevertheless we can well understand, as Duhm himself allows,,, in view of the political situation, why he should visit Babylon, since suspicion JEREMIAH 51. 59. B 279 Seraiah the son of Neriah, the son of Mahseiah, when he of complicity in the movement for revolt (xxvii) might well have " fallen upon him (see vol. i, p. 23, and the Introduction to xxviij xxviii). But if Seraiah went to Babylon, with or without the king, we may argue with some confidence that he received a com mission from Jeremiah. The story of his journey would otherwise have hardly come down to us, since Baruch's memoirs seem to have been exclusively devoted to the prophet and his work. If the story related anything incredible about Jeremiah we should be justified in setting it aside. But he looked forward to the ultimate overthrow of Babylon, and while he would hardly have fanned the flame of fanatical patriotism among the exiles or the Jews who remained in Palestine, he may well have expressed his conviction in this striking way to an adherent. He would thus give his own circle a proof that his predictions of Babylon's triumph and Judah's downfall at her hands were not an abandonment of his faith in the restoration and high destiny of Israel, or tantamount to the prediction of Babylon's permanent supremacy. And if to this it be replied that he could have disabused them of any misconception as to his attitude by a strong clear statement of his real position, without adopting such a theatrical method as is here described, it may be replied that the method adopted was far- more effective for his purpose. We are already familiar with the Hebrew idea of prophecy, that it did not merely announce the future but helped to create it. The prophetic word released energies which achieved its own fulfilment. But the solemn act was even more potent, in that the word was not only uttered and committed to writing, but taken to Babylon itself and sunk in its river, so that the doom it announced might cleave to the city and spread with the flow of the stream to its every part, and thus effect its- final overthrow. Thus Jeremiah gave an assurance of its downfall not by any theatrical piece of symbolism, but by himself setting 111 motion the forces which were to effect it. That there is an element of sympathetic magic in the sinking of the stone with the oracle bound to it is not to be denied ; butit would be unreasonable to take Jeremiah out of his intellectual environment. The concep tion of prophecy as working out its own fulfilment is not magical; the word of the living God was itself living and active, and could not return to Him void. li 59-64. Jeremiah's injunction to Seraiah when he accompanied him to Babylon. Jeremiah wrote on a scroll the doom of Babylon, and bade Seraiah, when he arrived there, read all the words, and afterwards sink the scroll in the Euphrates, saying, ' Thus shall Babylon sink, to rise no more.' li. 59. Cf. xxxii. 12, from which we learn that Seraiah was 280 JEREMIAH 51. 60-64. BSBSB went with Zedekiah the king ofjudah to Babylon in the fourth year of his reign. Now Seraiah was a chief cham- 60 berlain. ,And Jeremiah wrote in b. a book all the evil that should come upon Babylon, [S| even all these words that 61 are written concerning Babylon, [b] And Jeremiah said to Seraiah, When thou comest to Babylon, ° then see that: 62 thou read all. these words, [s] and say, O Lord, thou hast spoken concerning this place, to cut it off, that none shall dwell therein, neither man nor beast, but "that it 03 shall be 'desolate for ever. [B] And it shall be, when thou hast made an end of reading this book, that thou shalt bind astone to it, and, cast it into the midst of Euphrates : 64 and thou shalt say, Thus shall Babylon sink, and shall . " fOr, quartermaster b Or :,; one book ° Or, and shalt. see, and read . , , thens/'alt fhou say &c, Baruch's brother. On the historicity of the journey and the question whether Zedekiah also went to Babylon see the Intro duction to this section. . ,, , chief chamberlain. The margin 'quartermaster ' is, prefer r able ; this official would have to arrange for the halting-place where the company, would spend the night. Several prefer the LXX ' commissary of the presents,' i. e. the official who had charge of the presents for the king or the tribute due to him from Judah . It involves only slight change in the Hebrew consonants. 60. book : better scroll. The prophecy was probably quite short, and6ob, which seems to identify it with 1.2 — li. 58, should be oir/itted as an editorial link between the narrative and that oracle. 61. We are not to suppose that a public reading is intended, which would have been dangerous and also most unsuited to effect Jeremiah's wishes for the tranquillity of the exiles. It is a secret reading, Seraiah being either , alone or with a chosen, few. t The reading aloud is part of the process by, which the oracle is sped on its mission. 62. This verse interrupts the connexion between 61 and 63 andpresents other difficulties. It has echoes of the long prophecy on Babylon, 1. 3 and 1. 26, and should probably be regarded as a later insertion. 63. With the deletion of 62 this connects immediately with 61 On the significance of the action see the Introduction to this section. JEREMIAH 51. 64—52. 4. BRB 281 not rise again, because of the evil that I will bring a upon her : and they shall be weary. [B] Thus far are the words of Jeremiah. [E] b Zedekiah was one and twenty years old when he 52 began to reign; and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem : and his mother's name was Hamutal the daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah. And he did that which was evil in 2 the sight of the Lord, according to all that Jehoiakim had done. For through the anger of the Lord did it come 3 to pass in Jerusalem and Judah, until he had cast them out from his presence : and Zedekiah rebelled against the king of Babylon. And it came to pass in the ninth year 4 of his reign, in. the tenth month, in the tenth day of the a Or, upon her. And they shall be weary : thus far &c. b See 2 Kings xxiv. 18, &c; 64. and they shall be weary. This is no part of Seraiah's utterance. The subscription which follows, 'Thus far are tbe words of Jeremiah,' probably stood once after 58, and when it was removed to its present position, these words, which are one word in the Hebrew, were removed with it, presumably by acci dent, but possibly to indicate their original position. We might also interpret the words to mean that the, words of Jeremiah went down simply to ' and they shall be weary' (58), and did not include 50-64*. But this is not so likely. Iii. The Capture of Jerusalem and Fate of the People. This chapter is almost entirely taken from 2 Kings xxiv. 18— xxv, 21, 27-30, but Iii. 28-30 is derived from some other source. In accordance with the custom usually adopted in commentaries on Jeremiah, only such notes are Tiere given as are required by differences between the two. texts or by additions to the narrative in Kings. For the general exposition of the chapter the student should turn to Dr. Skinner's Commentary on the Books of Kings in this series. The text in Jeremiah is often better preserved than in Kings but it is unnecessary to make any minute comparison, or to repeat what Dr. Skinner has said on their mutual relations. 111. 4-16. These verses are also found in a shortened form in xxxix. i-io. 282 JEREMIAH 52. 5-13. E month, that Nebuchadrezzar iking of Babylon came, he and all his army, against Jerusalem, and encamped against 5 it ; and they built forts against it round about, So the city was besieged unto the eleventh year of king Zedekiah. 6 In the fourth month, in the ninth day of the month, the famine was sore in the city, so that there was no bread for 7 the people of the landii Then a breach was made in the city, and all the men of war fled, and went forth out of the city hy night! by the way of the gate between the two walls, which was by the king's garden ; (now the Chaldeans were against the city roundabout :) and they went by the 8 way of the Arabah. But the army of the Chaldeans pur sued 1 after the king, andovertook Zedekiah in the plains of Jericho; and all his army was scattered from him. 9 Then they tpbk. the king, and carried him up unto the king of Babylon to Riblah in the land of Hamath ; and 10 he a gave judgement upon him. And the king of Babylon slew the sons of Zedekiah before his eyes : he, slew also all 1 1 the princes of Judah in Riblah. And he put out the eyes of Zedekiah; arid the king of Baby lop bound him in fetters, and carried him to Babylon, and put him in prison till the day of his death. ' ' , 12 Now in the fifth month, in the tenth day of the month, which was the nineteenth year of king Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard, which stood before the king of Babylon, into Jeru- 13 salem: and he burned the house of the Lord, and, the *- Heb. Spake judgements with him. t 10, 11. These verses appear in an abbreviated form in 2 Kinks xxv. 7. Here we have added the slaughter of all the princes of Judah at Riblah, and the statement that Zedekiah was kent in prison to his death. p 12, tenth. 2 Kings xxv. 7 reads seventh. We have no grounds for a decision between the two. S'ounas JEREMIAH 52. r4-2I. E 283 king's house; and all the houses of Jerusalem, even "every great house, burned he with fire. And all the r4 army of the Chaldeans, that were with the captain of the guard, brake down all the walls of Jerusalem round about Then Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard carried away 15 captive of the poorest sort of the people, and the residue of the people that were left in the city, and those that fell away, that fell to the king of Babylon, and the residue of the ° multitude. But Nebuzaradan the captain of the 16 guard left of the poorest of the land to be vinedressers and husbandmen. And the pillars of brass that were in 17 the house of the Lord, and the bases and the brasen sea that were in the house of the Lord, did the Chaldeans break in pieces, and carried all the brass of them, to Babylon. The pots also, and the shovels, and the snuffers, 1 8 and the basons, and the spoons, and all the vessels of brass wherewith they ministered, took they away. And 19 the cups, and the firepans, and the basons* and the pots, and the candlesticks, and the spoons, and the bowls; that which was of gold, in gold, and that which was of silver, in silver, the captain of the guard took away. The 30 two pillars, the one sea, and the twelve brasen bulls that were under the bases, which king Solomon had made for the house of the Lord : the brass of all these vessels was without weight. And as for the pillars, the height of the 2.1 one pillar was eighteen cubits ; and a line of twelve cubits did compass it; and the thickness thereof was four fingers: a Or, every great man's house b -fOr, artificers 15. Omit 'of the poorest sort of the people and :' itisamistaken insertion from 16, which it contradicts, and is omitted in Kings. , 17-23. The account in Kings is considerably abbreviated, especially 21-23 which in Kings occupies only one verse. Dr. Skinner's notes on 1 Kings vii .should be consulted in addition to those on the parallels in 2 Kings. 284 JEREMIAH 52. 22-28. ES 22 it was hollow. And a chapiter of brass was upon it ; and the height of the one chapiter was five cubits, with network and pomegranates upon the chapiter round about, all of brass : and the second pillar also had like unto these, a3 and pomegranates. And there were ninety and six pome granates a on the sides ; all the pomegranates were an 24 hundred upon the network round about. And the captain of the guard took Seraiah the chief priest, and Zephaniah the second priest, and the three keepers of the b,door: 25 and out of the city he took an ° officer that was set. over the men of war ; and seven men of them that saw the king's face, which were found in the city ; and the scribe of the captain of the host, who mustered the people of the land; and .threescore men of the people, of .the land,, that 26 were found in the midst of the city. , And, Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard took them, and brought them to 2 7 the king of Babylon to Riblah. And the king of Babylon smote them, and put them to death at Riblah in the land of Hamath. So Judah was carried away captive out of 28 his land, [s] This is the people whom Nebuchadrezzar * Or, on the outside Heb. towards the four winds. b Heb. threshold. ° Or, eunuch ' 25. seven: in 2 Kings xxv. 19, ' five.' 28-30. After 27 the two texts diverge, to unite again at 31. In a, 'ngs xxv> aa-26 we have a summary account of the fortunes of the remnant in Palestine down to the murder of Gedaliah and the flight into Egypt, It is abridged from Jer. xxxix. n— xliii. 7. in our passage, which is absent injbjj LXX, we have an enumer ation of the captives taken away in threes-deportations. We do not know from what source this was added, and the passage presents difficulties ; but in view of these difficulties and the low- ness of the numbers, its statements seem to rest on excellent autho rity. But we should probably, read 'seventeenth' for 'seventh,' since the figures do not agree with those given as to the exile in 597 (2 Kings xxiv. 15, 16: on 13, 14 see Skinner's Commentary, p. 430). The first deportation will in that case fall at the beginning JEREMIAH 52. 29-33. 8 E 285 carried away captive : in the seventh year three thousand Jews and three and twenty : in the eighteenth year of 29 Nebuchadrezzar he carried away captive from Jerusalem eight hundred thirty and two persons : in the three and 30 twentieth year of Nebuchadrezzar Nebuzaradan the cap tain of the guard carried away captive of the Jews seven hundred forty and five persons : all the persons were four thousand and six hundred. [E] aAnd it came to pass in the seven and thirtieth 3* year of the captivity of Jehoiachin king of Judah, in the twelfth month, in the five and twentieth day of the month, that Evil-merodach king of Babylon, in the first year of his reign, lifted up the head of Jehoiachin king of Judah, and brought him forth out of prison ; and he spake kindly 32 to him, and set his throne above the throne of the kings that were with him in Babylon. And he changed his 33 a See 2 Kings xxv. 27-30. of the war with Zedekiah, and embrace the Jews of the districts outside Jerusalem, captured while the siege of the capital was in progress. We must further assume either that the captives taken after the capture of Jerusalem in Nebuchadnezzar's nineteenth year are not included, which would be an unaccountable omis sion, or suppose that the author of this fragment followed a different reckoning, calling the eighteenth what is elsewhere called the nineteenth year ; in which case the small number of the captives, eight hundred and thirty-two, taken from Jerusalem is very sur prising. Of the third deportation we learn nothing from any other early source. It occurred some years after the destruction of Jerusalem. Several scholars combine the statement with that in Josephus {Antiq. X. ix. 7) that Nebuchadnezzar in the twenty-third year of his reign invaded Coele-Syria, then attacked the Ammon ites and Moabites, and lastly Egypt from which he took to Babylon the Jews who were there. Some think that it was rather in con nexion with the campaign against Moab and Ammon that he took away more of the Palestinian Jews. 31-34. Taken from 2 Kings xxv. 27-30. 31. five and twentieth. 2 Kings xxv. 27 has 'seven and twentieth.' 286 JEREMIAH 52. 34. E prison garments, and did eat bread before him continually- all the days of his life. And for his allowance, there was a continual allowance given him of the king of Babylon, every day a portion until the day of his death, all the days of his life. THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH INTRODUCTION THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH INTRODUCTION I. Position in Canon, and Title. The English Bible follows the Septuagint and Vulgate in placing the Book of Lamentations immediately after the Prophecies of Jeremiah. This position, which is due to the belief expressed in the Introduction to the former version, that Jeremiah was the author, is not accorded to it in the Hebrew Canon. In this it is placed, not in the second collection, which embraces the Prophets along with the earlier Historical Books, but in the third collection known as The Writings. That the latter is its original position is probable, since the LXX translation was made by a different hand from that to which we owe the transr lation of Jeremiah. The book bears the title Eykah (i, e. How) in the Hebrew Bible, from the word with which it opens; but the Jews often spoke of it under the title Qinoth (i.e. Lamentations), and it bears an equivalent title in the LXX and Vulgate. II. Literary Form. The first four of the poems are acrostics. The first, second, and fourth each contain twenty-two verses, and each verse is introduced by its appropriate letter, begin ning with the first letter of the alphabet and closing with the last.. In the first and second chapters each, verse contains: three lines, while in chapter iv each contains two lines. In chap, iii there are sixty-six verses, each containing one line ; but each letter of the alphabet is thrice repeated- in successive groups of three verses. The fifth poem contains twenty-two verses, but is. not alphabetic in structure. It has been suggested- by C. J. Ball that originally it con- II U 290 LAMENTATIONS formed to the other poems in this respect, and he has madsjsuggestions for the restoration of the original. But such reconstructions necessarily involve so much departure from the present text that at the best their character must be very uncertain. The choice of the acrostic form for poems of this character is not quite easy, to understand, since the necessity of conforming to an artificial scheme hampers the freedom of expression and fetters the natural develop ment of the thought.. It is possible that originally the alphabetic structure was chosen because some magical efficacy was attached to it. But later it became one among other literary, types,' as in the present book, Other acros tics are tojie found in Pss. xxv, xxxiv, xxxvii, cxi, cxiii, cxix, cxlv, Pro v.xxxL 10^31. In all probability Pss. ix and x originally formed ah alphabetic poem, and traces of the alphabetic arrangement are also to be found in Nahum i. One: curious feature is presented by our book. In Lam. i the acrostic adopts the usual order of the Hebrew alphabet, Pe following Ayin, but in Lam. ii— iv Pe precedes Ayin. This order, which perhaps is to be found elsewhere, has not yet been , satisfactorily explained. Some scholars suppose that the xlvii.- 7. As in 11, the last line is an appeal by .the city to Yahweh j which prepares for the transition to direct speech in ia. AQ« The enemy has greedily seized; all Zjpn's 'pleasant things,'' the special reference in this context being to'the Temple treasures. The sense of the Temple's sanctity was deeply outraged by the intrusion of the heathen into it. The feeling was probably inten- LAMENTATIONS 1. n, 12 307 For she hath seen that the heathen are entered into her sanctuary, Concerning whom thou didst command that they should not enter into thy congregation. All her people sigh, they seek bread > 1 1 They have given their pleasant things for meat to refresh the soul : ; See, O Lord, and behold ; for I am become vile. Is it nothing to you, all ye that pass by? 12 sifted in the later period, the profanation by Antiochus Epiphanes, the entrance of Pompey into the Holy of Holies, being resented with the utmost horror and bitterness. In Pss. Ixxiv and lxxix. we perhaps have reflected the emotion stirred by an earlier pro fanation in the Persian period, to which some would also refer Isa. Ixiii. 7 — Ixiv. 12. In the first century of our era there was a Greek inscription warning Gentiles, on penalty of death, not to pass beyond the barrier which marked the limits of the court of the Gentiles. . This inscription has been discovered in recent times. The third line, with its reference to Deut. xxiii. 3, though in a generalized form (cf. Ezek. xliv. 9), brings out that it is a Divine, not merely a human prohibition, which the heathen have transgressed. L8hr suspects that this line was originally a mar ginal gloss which has taken the place of the original third line. But if a marginal gloss was inserted in the text, we should have expected the verse to consist of four lines, as is the case with 7, rather than that a line should be struck out to make room for it. Bickell, followed by Cheyne, reads in the first line ' Zion spreadeth forth h^r hands, because of her pleasant things,' the. gesture in that case expressing distress. 1 1 . Oettli is probably right in thinking that the special reference in this verse is to the conditions after the fall of Jerusalem. Such valuables as they had been able to save from the disaster they had been compelled tp part with to buy bread. So in v. 4 the complaint is made that they have tq purchase the water and the wood which , once they had owned, meat : literally ' bread,' i. e. food. 12. The second half of the poem begins nt this point. Zion. is now the speaker, except in 17. .a The text of the first ljne is probably corrupt. The rendering in E V is very dubious ; the Hebrew is literally ' Not to you, all ve that Dass by.' The LXX apparently took the negative lo' as the particle /«', ' would that,' though it is possible that the transla- X 2 308 LAMENTATIONS 1. 13 Behold, and see if there be any sorrow like unto my sorrow, which is done unto me, a Wherewith tbe Lord hath afflicted me in the day of his fierce anger. 13 From on high hath he sent fire into my bones, and it prevaileth against them : He hath spread a net for my feet, he hath turned me back; •-¦> a Or, Whom the Lord hath afflicted tor read 6y, ' alas.' The verse must have begun with Lamed, but this letter is written small in the Hebrew text, which also may point to textual corruption. Several suggestions have been made for the restoration of the text, but none inspires any great confidence. Budde reads 'Oh, all ye that pass by, look on me and see ; ' L6hr ' Therefore, all ye that pass by, look and see.' all ye that pass by. The traveller, as he pausesbefore the ruins of Zion, is asked whether in all his wanderings he has seen a sight so pathetic, a grief so bitter, so absorbing ; all the more- bitter that it is her own God who has smitten her in His hot anger. 13. Yahweh has sent from heaven a fire into Zion's bones ; the reference is not, of course, to the fortresses, as the hard bony parts of the structure ; the metaphor implies that the Divine judge ment has entered like a flame her inmost being, a fever whose racking pains ended in death. The figure is borrowed apparently from Jer. xx. 9 : cf. Ps. cii. 3, Job xxx. 30. it prevaileth against them. The word is not very appro priate ; the verb may bear the same sense as the cognate form in Aramaic, to chastise. We might adopt this, and with a slight change read ' and chastened me.' The Vulgate read the Hebrew in this way. spread a net for my feet. The metaphor is not uncommon in the Psalms to describe the plots devised by the writer's enemies for their ruin. The Psalmists do not represent God as spreading a net for the feet. In Ezek. xii. 13 (cf. xvii. 20) Yahweh says with reference to Zedekiah, ' My net also will I spread upon him, and he shall be taken in my snare ; ' similarly in Hos. vii. 12, ' When they shall go, I will spread my net upon them : ' cf.- Jer. 1. 24. The most striking development of the metaphor is in Bilda'd's graphic description of the snares and terrors which beset the wicked on every side (Job xviii. 8-1 1). he hath turned me hack. We should rather have expected the line to be completed by some such clause as, ' and taken me LAMENTATIONS 1. 14 309 He hath made me desolate and faint all the day. The yoke of my transgressions is bound by his hand ; 14 They are knit together, they are come up upon my neck ; he hath made my strength to a fail : The Lord hath delivered me into their hands, b against whom I am not able to stand. a Heb. stumble. b Or, from whom I am not able to rise up in its toils.' If the poet intended to continue the metaphor of the net, he has not done so in a very felicitous way : snares are set to entrap, not to turn back ; for the latter the figure of a barrier would have been more appropriate. The two parts of the verse should presumably be regarded as mutually independent. 14, This is a very difficult verse. The verb rendered 'is bound' occurs nowhere else, and its existence is dubious. The substitu tion of another consonant {ne'eqad for nisqad, so Cheyne) would give the sense ' is bound ; ' the verb occurs in Gen. xxii. 9 only. Or we might read niqshar (so Ball). Written with a Shin instead of a Sin (the difference being one simply of a diacritical point), the verb means 'to watch.' Since the word rendered 'yoke' may be so pointed as to mean 'upon,' the LXX naturally took the Hebrew to mean ' Watch is kept over my transgressions.' , We should then have to suppose either that the word rendered 'by his hand' is to be regarded as a fragment of the second part of the line, or connect it with the following word, rendering ' by his hand are they twisted together.' The second line will then consist of 'they are come up . . . fail.' Since this is unduly short, Budde proposes to insert the word for ' yoke ' (reading 'dlu 'ol 'at), which is all the easier that the two consonants of which it is composed already occur twice, and then continues in the next clause with a plural verb. ¦ ' They have come up as a yoke upon my neck ; they have made my strength to fail.' This restoration of the first two lines does not give the most satisfactory sense, but it is perhaps the nearest approximation to the original that has so far been pro posed The meaning will be that Yahweh watches over Zion's transgressions, twining them together into a rope of many strands, which is laid like a yoke on her neck, and has exhausted her The third line gives a good sense, but the Hebrew would run more'smoothly if, with Budde, we read 'their hand' instead of 'the hands of ' rendering ' Yahweh hath delivered me into their hand, I am not able to rise up.' 3io LAMENTAf IONS 1. 15, 16 15 The Lord hath set at nought all my mighty 'men in the rriidst of me; He hath called a solemn assembly against me to crush my young men: The Lord hath trodden as in a Winepress the virgin daughter of Judah. 16 For these things I. weep; mine eye, mine eye runneth down with water ; Because the-comforter that should refresh my soul is far from me': My children are desolate, because the ehemy hath pre vailed. :'•¦ in 15. The heroes of Zion are powerless against the might of Babylon ; the' foe assembles against her warriors as if to celebrate a sacrificial banquet (cf. Zeph. i. 7, 8, Jer. xlvi. 10, Ezek. xxxix. 17-20, Isa. xxxiv. 6) to which the ruddy wine will not be wanting, for Yahweh has tto'dden human grapes in His winepress, the wine is the blood of Judah. The metaphor of the last line is powerfully worked out in the brilliant, if morally repulsive, description of Yahweh's return from His triumph over Edom in Isa. lxiii, 1-6: cf. Joel iii. 13, and the imitative passages Rev. xiv. 18-20, xix. 15. virgin daughter of Judah : not Judah 's virgin daughter, but Judah conceived as a young virgin, the genitive being one of apposition. The designation is based on Isaiah's ' Virgin daughter qf Zion.' But it is not equivalent to it ; Zion is the speafcler, hut she refers to Judah in the, third person, and means the population of the whole kingdom. Bickell identifies the two, and supposes that here the poet speaks in Wis own person and refers to Zion in the third person. Since he does this in 17, Bickell infers that 16 and 17 should be transposed, so that this line should stand in immediate connexion with 17. This Would secure the same order of the alphabet as in ii-iv, according to Which Pe precedes Ayin. But this is to be Rejected riot only because Zion and Judah are not to be identified, but because it would spoil the present symmetrical division of Zion's speech into two equal halves, 12-16 and 18-22. 16. On metrical grounds the repetition of ' mine eye ' must be regarded as a mistake, due -to dittography. The second arid third lines consist mainly of echoes of earlier verses. these thing's: i.e. those enumerated in 13-15. LAMENTATIONS 1. 17-19 311 Zion spreadeth forth her hands'; there is none to com- 17 fort her ; The Lord hath cdmmanded concerning Jacob, that they that are round about him should be his adver- ' saries : Jerusalem is among them as an unclean thing. The Lord is righteous ; for I have rebelled against his 18 commandment: Hear, I pray you, all ye peoples, and behold my sorrow : My virgins and my young men are gone into captivity. I called for my lovers, but they deceived me: 19 17. The poet speaks in his own person. This verse also has points of contact with earlier parts of the poem. Zion spreads out her hands in entreaty to a pitiless world ; Yahweh has decreed that -Jacob's neighbours should be his foes ; they look on Jerusalem with loathing, asa man would shrink from the ceremonially unclean. In the later period the name Jacob (fi. 2, 3) Was used for the nation with greater frequency and without the sinister suggestions of irickiness and self-seeking that once attached to it. For the hostility of the surrounding peoples see note on 2 and Jer. xii; 7- 17 (with the notes). 18. Zion resumes her utterance With a confession that Yahweh isrighteousln thus afflicting her; it is the due punishment for her rebellion: cf. 5, 8, 14, 20, 22. She turns to the nations, as before to the wayfarer (ra), appealing to their compassion in spite of their former lack of sympathy; she ¦ cannot believe that they would withhold their pity if they but considered the bitterness of her bereavement. My Virgins and my youngr men. This order is found only here and in ii. 21, Amos viii. 13. 1. are gone into captivity. The reference is probably to the deportation to Babylon, though possibly to the Selling of youths and maidens into foreign slavery : see note on 5. 19. the poet touches again (cf. 2,8) the faithlessness of JudaK's allies ; when her crisis came they betrayed her trust. Then1 he passes on to the religious and secular leaders of the people, who perished of hunger; while vainly seeking food to bring back their exhausted vitality. At the end. of the verse the LXX adds 'and found it not.' Metrical considerations forbid its addition, [Unless something is removed to take its place. Dyserinck and Budde substitute it for ' to refresh their souls.' It is true that this expres sion occurs in 11, 16, but this poem is marked by numerous 312 LAMENTATIONS 1. zo, 2i My priests and mine elders, gave up the ghost in the city, „ Whjle they(sought them meat to refresh their souls. 20 Behold) 0 Lord.; for I am in distress ; my bowels are troubled ; Mine heart is turned within me ; for Lhave grievously rebelled: • , ; Abroad the sword bereaveth, at home there is as death. ai They have heard that I sigh ; there is none to comfort All mine enemies have heard of my trouble; they are glad that thou hast done it : ,, Thou wilt bring the day that thou hast proclaimed, and they shall belike unto me. repetitions, and that their search was unsuccessful is sufficiently indicated by the previous line. BaU reads ' For they sought food to restore life, arid found it not? ¦> ' 20. From the description of her calamities Zion turns to Yah weh in prayer, though the prayer itself contains fresh mention of her troubles. . Ball reads ' my inwards burn ' instead of ' For I have grievously Irebelled,' Which is more suitable- to the context. The third line presents some difficulty. The general sense is clear ,: thesword bereaves outside the city ; death, i. e, the pestilence (see note ' on Jer. xv. a), rages within. . But ' there is as death ' is strange. The omission of a single consonant gives the reading ,' at home there is death,' which is quite satisfactory except that it is not quite easy to account for the origin of the. present text It is accepted by several scholars, and is probably the best way out of the difficulty. , , 21. The text is in some disorder. At the beginning we should probably read, 'with the omission of one consonant, ' Hear how I sigh,' the words being addressed to Yahweh as at the beginning of ao. The text has been assimilated to the second line. The second and third lines i as at present arranged are metrically irregular. We can best overcome the difficulty by transposing (with Lohr) the latter part of the second line and the former part of the third) ' All mine enemies have heard of my trouble, thou hast brought ^the day that thou didst proclaim ; • > They are glad that thou hast done it, let them be like unto me.' The'' day ' is that of Zion's downfall foretold by the prophets. LAMENTATIONS 1. 22—2. 1 313 Let all their wickedness come before thee ; 22 And do unto them, as thou hast done unto me for all my transgressions : For my sighs are many, and my heart is faint. How hath the Lord covered the daughter of Zion with 2 a cloud in his anger ! He hath cast down from heaven unto the earth the beauty of Israel, 22. The prayer for vengeance on her exulting foes is more fully developed in this verse and supported by a moral motive. The spirit is one of retaliation, but it is given a more decorous expres sion by the plea that they also are guilty of wickedness, which merits an equal punishment with the rebellion ofZion. Ball reads at the beginning of the verse ' Let the time of their calamity, come.' ii. 1-22. The Second Elegy. This poem is of higher poetical value than the first elegy ; it is written with a much more vivid sense of the catastrophe, appar ently by one who had Uved through it and seen with his own eyes the pitiful scenes and the horrors he describes. It is less imade up of generalities, and deals far more with concrete realities.',- Its affinities with Ezekiel suggest a date a few years after the destruc tion of Jerusalem, and favour the view that the author was himself an exile. For a spirited rendering of Lam. ii and iv see G. A. Srciith, Jeru salem, vol. ii. ii. li How : see note on i. 1. covered . . . with a cloud. This is probably the correct ren dering of the verb, which occurs nowhere else in the O. T-. The dense cloud which covers Zion is a symbol of the gloom which has settled upon her, and the shrouding of her glory from the gaze of the world. Cheyne reads ' put to shame.' daughter of Zion : see note on i. 15. It occurs six, times in this poem; 'daughter of Judah ' twice ; 'daughter of Jerusalem' twice. " .' . . . :, the heauty of Israel. This may be an expression for the srlorv of Israel, its exalted position; or it may designate some concrete object, either the Temple (Isa. lxiv. n) or Jerusalem. Exalted to heaven, it had been thrust down from that proud pre-eminence. Yet thrust down to earth, not to Sheol ; its ruin is not irretrievable. 314 LAMENTATIONS 2.' 2, ,3 And hath not remembered his footstool in the day of '¦¦- ' hisanger. ¦>.< The Lord hath swallowed up all the habitations of Jacob, and hath not pitied ; He hath thrown down in his wrath the strong holds of the daughter of Judah ;' ' ¦''-¦ '' He hath brought them down to the ground : ' He hath profaned' the kingdom and the princes thereof. He hath cut off in fierce anger a all the horn of Israel ; *, Or, every horn his footstool. Obviously this cahhot'be, as in Isa.' Jxvi. 1, the Whole earth,rbut either the( ark as in 1 Chron. xxViii. 2, or. the Temple as Eiek. xliii. 7 and' propaMy Ps. xcix. 5, cxxxii. 7. The latter is much the more likely, especially as it is questionable if the ark was in existence when Jerusalem was captured. 2. There is a metrical irregularity,' which is relieved, if not completely! removed, by Ldhr's rearrangement -of ithe 'second and'thirdilmes, . r; ' ' He hath thrown down, brought down to the ground the strong holds of the daughters of Judah'; He hath profaned in his wrath the 'king and the princes thereof.' The changje of 'kingdom '.into ' king,' accepted also by Bickell, is not for metrical reasons, but follows the LXX, Syriac, andArabip ; cf. 9, and Isa. xliii, 28(R, V. margin), ' will profane the holy princes.' The verse describes first the unsparing devastation of the home steads and pastures in the country districts (this being the special sense borne by ' habitations '), then the overthrow of the fortresses, and finally the desecration of Icing and princes. The divifriry that 'doth hedge a king,' 'which- made an" outrage on 'the Lord's anointed ' something of a sacrilege to antique' thought, was rudely stripped away, and the secondary sarictity, Which was communi cated to princes of the Wood (cf. Isa. xliii. 28 as above), naturally disappeared with the primary. On the origin of this conception in primitive superstition, Dr. Frazer's The Golden 'Bough, Part I, 'The Magic Art and the Evolution of Kings' (191 1), may be con sulted With advantage. 3. The horn is often in the O.T. the symbol of Strength ':' the meaning is that all the might of Israel has been cut off. The right hand which formerly YahWeh had stretched out in defence of His people, He has drawn back, leaving them dependent on them selves alone in presence of the enemy. Thus having in His wrath LAMENTATIONS 2, 4-6 315 He hath drawn back his right' hand from before the enemy ¦ ¦Aijd-he hath burned up Jacob like a flaming.fire,. which devoureth round about. ,; ;ii ¦• ,He bath bent his bow lilce an enerny, he hath stood 4 with-his right hand as an adversaTy>' '¦>¦¦¦>¦< ',$&',$*&¦ slain ail that" we're ^eisapt-to'^eiey^:' a In the tent of the daughter of Zion he' hath poured out his fury -like fire. The Lord is become as an enemy, he hath swallowed 5 up Israel; He hath swallowed up all her palaces, he hath destroyed his strong holds : And he hath multiplied in the daughter , of Judah mourning and lamentation. And he hath violently taken away his b tabernacle, as if 6 it were of a gar-den ;., - . ,. . aOr, On Or, booth Or, hedge cut off their strength, and then withdrawn His own protection, they are at the mercy of the foe. Not content with depriving thettt'df all power of defence, He has taken the offensive against them^and.burhed Jacob as with ,'aa'ev'ouf ing fire. 4. This verse also is only imperfectly preserved. The sescphd half of the first line is too Idng ; L6hr is probably right in thinking that ' with his right hand ' has been mistakenly inserted from 3. The second line has been wrongly printed in R.V. It should run : , .'And hath, slain all that, were pleasant to the eye in the tent of the daughter of Zion.' . The third line is nnfortunatelyLincomplete, the second half having been lost. Yahweh is in this'verse represented as an archer (cf. the powerful description in Job xvi. 13) ranging Himself against His people and slaying the ydlliiths and maidens of Zion. Another restoration (by Cheyne) may be seen in Enc. Bib. 2698. 5. mourning and lamentation. - Streane reproduces the assonance in the Hebrew by rendering 'groaning and moaning ; ' Cheyne renders ' moaning and bemoaning.' 6. This verse is difficult. The first line in the Hebrew is repre- 316 LAMENTATIONS 2. 6 He hath destroyed his place of assembly ; sented by two lines in the R.V. ¦' The referenced 'a garden' is barely intelligible. The rendering ' as if it were of a garden' suggests that the tabernacle of Yahweh has been removed with as little compunction as if it were a temporary booth in a garden. But the Hebrew is more naturally Tendered ' as a garden,' and this yields no satisfactory sense. The LXX reads ' as a vine,' but this is no better. Since both words begin with the same conso nant, L6hr may be right -in thinking that the Hebrew and the LXX are expansions of the same abbreviation. De Hoop SchefFer reads, with the addition of a single consonant, ' as a thief ' {ganndb for gan), and this has been accepted by Dyserinck and Budde. In that case we should adopt the margin ' hedge; 'for ' tabernacle,' and explain that Yahweh, has brpken down the- hedge round Zion as ruthlessly as a thief would break down a fence which protected property he desired to rob. If this was the original text it was perhaps intentionally altered, both in the Hebrew and the LXX, because the comparison seemed offensive. It is better than the Heb. and LXX, but it leaves something to be desired in lucidity, and the context favours the rendering ' tabernacle ' rather than ' hedge,' since it is with the Temple that the poet is now concerned. Accordingly we must resign ourselves to recognizing that the text is corrupt. The general sense is fortunately clear. Cheyne gives a suggested restoration of 6-8 in Enc. Bib. 2698. place of assembly. This sense is required by the context. The word is the same as that rendered ' solemn assembly ' in the next line/and though the' meaning ' place of assembly ', js. attested by Ps, Ixxiv. 8, it is suspicious that the word should be used in two senses in successive lines; Budde thinks that the original text may have read ' his Vineyard ' {karmo), which was perhaps, inten-' tiohally alfered by the same hand to .which we owe 'as a garden.' - But 'his vineyard ' would surely, have seemed quite unobjec tionable to him ; it would suit the present text quite as well as. that which De HoopScheffer substitutes. If, as is probable, neither is correct, we may dismiss the emendation ' his vineyard.' Thecon- text requires a designation of the Temple. The present writer is inclined to thinkthat ' his sanctuary ' (miqddsho instead of -mo'ado) should be read. The corruption was facilitated by the fact that thenext word {shikkah) began with sh, and by the occurrence of mo'ed in the next line. It is true that this word recurs in 7, but so also does mo'ed, i. e. three times in two verses, and the use of the same word in the same sense in consecutive verses is less objec tionable than the use of the same word in different senses' in consecutive lines. LAMENTATIONS 2. 7 317 The Lord hath caused a solemn assembly and sabbath to be forgotten in Zion, And hath despised in the indignation of his anger the king and the priest. The Lord hath cast off his altar, he hath abhorred his 7 sanctuary, He hath given up into the hand of the enemy the walls ' of her palaces : a +Or, appointed feast the king and the priest. The king is mentioned here, as the context requires and the coupling with the priest suggests, in virtue of his official relation to the cultus. 7. The second line is difficult and probably corrupt. This verse, like the preceding, is occupied with the Temple ; a reference to palaces is out of place. If the term is taken to mean certain parts of the Temple, such a meaning occurs nowhere else, and since ' sanctuary ' is a masculine noun, the feminine ' her palaces is hard to account for. Elsewhere the expression 'to give up into the hand of has persons, not things, for its object. Several scholars hold that the text needs to be altered. Dyserinck thinks some such word-as ' his dwelling ' should be substituted for 'her palaces.' Budde suggests very cleverly that we should emend it into 'his ark of the covenant' {'dron bfritho for 'armenotheyhd), and strike out ' the walls of as a mistaken insertion from the next verse. This suggestion, like the preceding, is open to the objection that we should expect the object to be persons, not things. , Even if we waive this, as in this context we well may, it remains ques tionable if a mention of the ark is to be expected here (see notes on 1). Cheyne reads for 'the.walls of her palaces,' 'all her precious things;' similarly in 8 'to destroy the precious things of Zion.' Lohr simply leaves a blank in his translation. The poet compares the noise made in the Temple by the Baby lonian soldiers to that made on ' the day of a solemn assembly,' an allusion, all the more significant that it is quite incidental, to the orgiastic character of the cultus in the pre-exilic period. It is also clear that the poet was himself familiar with the Temple-worship before the destruction of Jerusalem, a fact which corroborates what we shouldotherwise infer from the poem, that he was an eyewit ness of its siege and fall. The description may be illustrated from Ps. Ixxiv. 3-7, even though thisprobably refers to a later calamity, especially from verse 4, 'Thine adversaries have roared in the midst of thine assembly.' 3 1 8 LAMENTATIONS 2. S, 9 They have made a- noise in the house of the Lord1, as in the day of a solemn assembly The,. Lord hath purposed to destroy tne wall of the daughter of Zion ; Hejhath stretched out the line, he hath not withdrawn his hand from a destroying : , But he hath made the rampart and wall to lament; they languish together. : " Her gates are sunk, into the ground ; he hath destroyed — - and broken her- bars : Her king and her princes are among the nations' Where the law is riot ';' a Heb. swallowing up. 8. The poet passes on from the Temple to the walls and gates of the city and itsmost prominent inhabitants.' The walls and gates are specially mentioned, because while they remained intact the city kept its foes at bay, and when the city was captured they were broken down (2 Kings xxv. io=Jer. Iii. 14) as a precaution against future rebellion (cf. Ezra iv. 12-16). Although Jerusalem was reduced to the extremities of famine (12, 19, 20; iv. 3, 4, 9, 10, 2iKingsxxv.3=Jer. Iii. 6), the city was not actually starved into surrender, but ' a breach was made in the city ' (2 Kings xxv. 4 = Jer. hi 7). stretched out the line. This metaphor is employed elsewhere not only for building or restoration (Zech. i. 16) but for pulling down as here :cf. Amos vii. 7-9 ; 2 Kings xxi. 13, 'And I will stretch over Jerusalem the line of Samaria, and the plummet of the house of Ahab;' Isa. xxxiv. n, 'he shall stretch over ittheline of confusion and the,plummet of emptiness.' The work of destruction will be carefully planned and thoroughly executed. ' not withdrawn his hand. God's hand was withdrawn from the defence of His people<'(s); it is stretched out to destroy the city.. .','.. 1 " ' .¦¦..¦!¦ For the vivid personification in the third-line cf. i. 4, Jer. xiv.- 2. 9. In the first line, ' destroyed '' and ' broken ' are variants, one of which must be, deleted on metrical grounds. The latter* is used in Amos i. 5, Jer. li. 30, and may be either retained or struck out on that ground. Bickell and Budde strike it out, but read 'her bars are destroyed,' so that Yahweh ceases to be the subject, as in the rest of the verse. where the lawis not. If this rendering is correct, the mean. LAMENTATIONS 2. io,u 319 Yea, her prophets find no vision from the Lord. The elders of tbe daughter of Zion sit upon the ground, 10 r they keep silence; They have cast up dust upon their heads;, they have girded themselves with sackcloth : The virgins of Jerusalem hang down their heads to the ground. Mine eyes do fail with tears, my bowels are troubled, 11 ing is that the king and princes are in a heathen land where ,the Law cannot be fulfilled because the land is unclean. But it is more likely that we should take, the jwor.ds as an -independent sentence, and explain ' law ' as the ritual direction given by the priests (Jer. xviii. 18, see the note ; Ezek. vii. 26, Mai. iii 7). The verse then expresses the same idea with reference to three classes, rulers, priests, and prophets, that they are precluded from exercis- ingtheir proper duties. It is the function of kings and princes to rule; but obviously when they and their people are exiles in a foreign land this has become impossible; the duty of the priest is to give iorah or ritual instruction, but with the cessation of the cultus there is no demand for lorah ; the prophet is such because he receives * vision ' from Yahweh and proclaims to the people what he has thus learnt, but though there are prophets in the cap tivity Yahweh vouchsafes them no vision, their vocation has gone. This last statement is somewhat surprising-from a poet who was apparently acquainted with Ezekiel's prophecies and had been influenced by them. But presumably he is thinking here, asin 14, of the prophets whom Jeremiah and Ezekiel alike condemned and whom the fall of Jerusalem had discredited. We should render the two lines : 'Her king and her princes are among the nations • there is no priestly direction ; . Also her prophets find not a vision from Yahweh. , 10 While king and princes govern no longer, while priests have no occupation, and prophets see no yision, the elders sit in dumb despair on the ground and no longer give counsel in the gate. Thev have sprinkled dust on, their head (2 S^m. , xui. 19, Job 11. 2 Ezek. xxvii. 3°) ^d 8irded thewselves, witi* .sackcloth, both expressions of mourning. The virgins in deep dejectiqnhow their heads to the ground. ¦* -i, 11 The poet, in a moving passage, now describes; his own aneuish at the suffering of his people ; in the siege, especially at th7 pitiful spectacle of the little children swoonmg frpm, hunger, 320 LAMENTATIONS 2. 12, 13 My liver is poured upon the earth, for the a destruction of the daughter of my people; Because the young children and the sucklings swoon in the streets of the city. I2 They say to their mothers, Where is corn and wine? When they swoon as the wounded in the streets of the city, When their soul is poured out into their mothers' bosom. 13 What shall I b testify unto thee ? what shall I liken to thee, O daughter of Jerusalem ? a Or, breach b Or, take to witness for thee in the streets, vainly begging for food which the heart-broken mothers have no power to give. His pity for the children comes out again in 20, iv. 3, 4, 10. My liver : mentioned like the bowels as a seat of emotion. The statement that it is poured on the ground is strangely expressed, but it is to be compared with the similar phrase ' Pour out thine heart' in 19 : cf. Ps. lxii. 8. 18. corn and wine. Budde omits 'and wine,' no doubt correctly. The metre requires the omission ; the request for wine is not in itself probable, and elsewhere the word for wine used here (ydyin) is coupled with that for ' bread ; ' a different word for wine (tlrosh) being combined with 'corn.' In the LXX, where the Hebrew speaks of some one as eating, the translator often adds that he drank. Here a similar addition has been made, while the Syriac, by a still more thoughtless addition, reads. 'corn and wine and oil. their soul is poured out: i.e. they lapse into unconsciousness, either of swoon or death; the former seems to be intended here. ApatheUc touch is added to the picture by the last words: the mother strains to her breast the exhausted body of her child as it faints with hunger. 13. The poet tries to bethink himself of some parallel cata strophe ; if he could discover one, Zion might take some comfort trom the fact that her disaster was not unexampled. Alas, it is immeasurable as the sea. ' '%ftu* ™to thee- °f what can he assure Zion ? But we should probably correct the text and, with Krochmal and Meinhold, read * compare' ( e'erok) for ' testify,' as in Isa. xl. 18. LAMENTATIONS 2. 14, i5 321 ; What shall I equal to thee, that I may comfort thee, O virgin daughter of Zion?; i For thy breach is great like the sea : who camheAl thee? , Thy prophets have seen visions for thee of vanity and 14 ¦ ;! foolishness; .- j;i . : ;):: And they have not discovered thine iftfejuityy to bring again thy captivity : But have seen for thee a burdens of vanity and u causes of banishment. All that pass by clap their hands at thee ; 15 They hiss and wag their head at the daughter of Jeru salem^ saying-. * •f'Or, oracles b Or, things to draw thee aside 14. The poet complains of the prophets, who have prophesied falsely and covered up the sin of "Jerusalem. If they had only done their duty, he implies, the captivity might have been averted. It is remarkable that he ignores Jeremiah's pessimistic verdict on the conduct of the people, and the obstinate self-complacency, on whichhis message madebut littleimpression. Nor could Jeremiah be himself the writer of this passage. He judged the situation quite differently. True, he denounced the prophets in scathing- terms. But priests and people were held guilty by him, and he would have refused to excuse them pn the score that the prophets had not done their duty. ' foolishness., The word bears rather the sense of 'whitewash : ' the prophets have palliated the conduct of the people, represented it in altogether too favourable a light. to bring again thy captivity : see note on Jer. xxix. 14. Here the term apparently means 'to avert thy captivity;' theA.V., ' to turn away thy captivity,' hits the sense better. . • r causes of banishment. The word occurs here only, but the derivation fixes its meaning as 'banishment.' The meaning cannot be that the prophets foresaw the expulsion of Judah, for they strenuously denied it,but that the attitude which they encour aged by their oracles" inevitably led to exile. The visions they saw were in this sense' causes of banishment.' 15. The mockery of the travellers (i. 12) as they pause to con template the ruins of the once famous city. Probably the gestures in this verse are intended to express scorn and astonishntentrather than exultation : see Job xxvii, 23, « Men shall clap their hands at II V 322 LAMENTATIONS &S 16, i j Is this the eity that mencalkd The perfection of.'beaiity, The joy of the whole earth? 16 All thine enemies have opened their mouth wideagaimst thee; They hiss and gnash the teeth ; they say, We have, "f" swallowed her up ; ;:,¦ :. •?" , Certainly this is the day that we 'looked for; we have '¦" --•- fouhd,p we hav& seen' it. - ii • •' i ' - • i • ' ffiat^nen called. This should be struck out on account of the ¦Metre, probably also- ' the ^ity.' The- line gains" greatly in force. •by the ohiissions.' '1 - ,,:¦_ The perfection of beauty : cf. Ps. 1. 2, Ezek. xvi. 14 (and with reference to Tyre), xxvii. 4, xxviii. 12. - The joy of the whole earth : so Ps. xlviii. 2, Cf. Isa. Ix. 15;. 10-.' WhiI6the traveller, who has no animosity against Jeru salem, view* the ruins with amazement and contempt, the gestures of her enemies express their- bitter hate and: vindictive joy at her Overthrow. The first line is imitated in iii. 46; •<<¦•" ¦' '¦ * opened their mouth wide : cf. Ps. xxii. 13, xxxv. 2r. Lohr points, out that -our poem; has- several points of contact with Ps. xxxv.J Thus 'gnash the teeth ' in this verse and' Ps. xrtxv. 16; 'we have sWalldWed \iki up,' sb Ps. xxxv. 25; 'Wfthave seenit',' cf.' Ps. XXXV. 21. ;'' !<<»>'"' ,J. ,,..,.,<.-.. ¦,:'.:..¦¦ '-, ¦; 17. The^.udgemeht which h&s come dri Jerusalem-is onlv what - J grounds 1 would he a mistake to exclude the threats uttered by the propiiets. 'The days of old ' need'not refer to remote antiquity; the prophets of the eighth century would be reckoned to that period. :r • LAMENTATIONS '2.' 1V19 323 He hath exalted the horn, of thine adversaries; Their heart cried unto the Lord : 18 O wall ofthe daughter of: Zion, let tears run down like a river day and night ; Give thyself no respite; let not the apple of thine ieye '"" cease. •¦ .-,-- Arise, cry oUt in the night, at the beginning rof the 19 watches; '¦' ' exalted the horn : see note on 3; cf; Ps.'lxxxix-.'i7, 24,;xcii. 10, cxii. 9, cxlviii. 14 ; 1 Sam. ii. 1, 10. ~ ¦ i. . 18: It is generally recognized that the beginning of the verse is- corrupt. - The- present text begins with the statement that 'their heart cried ' (whose heart is not said), and then the wall of Jerusalem is bidden weep, cry out, and intercede for the life of her young children. The arrangement in the E.V.,atecording to which the statement is detached from the exhortation, to some extent disguises the difficulty,' which is felt -snore acutely when it is seen that the first line goes down to 'ZionJ But a statement.' is: out of place here, and the reference to .the wall is also strange. The verse should begin with, exhortation. Ewald read the imperative ' cry ' for the perfect ' cried ' {tsa'dqi for tsd'aq), and this emenda tion has been generally accepted, though /opinions differ as to the precise restoration of the restof the phrase, e.g. 'cry. out with thy heart,' 'cry outwith thy voice.' For 'Owall ofthe daughter.of Zion' several scholars read *Q virgin daughter of Zion, ' supposing that the'present 'text has originated under the influence of 8. ThisJs probably the correct solution', though other suggestions have>heeh made to restore an originalin.closer conformity with the: presefit text, fi/heyne reads 'Cry out because of Jerusalem's -disgrace, Zion's insult.' ' - • let tears run down : cf. Jer. xiv: 1.7.. apple of thine eye: c£ Deut. xxxii. 10, Ps. xvii. 8 for this •designation ofthe pupil ofthe eye, though in these passages it is mentionedvas an objecfcof peculiar care. 19. This verse contains a line too many. The fourth: line should be struck out as a later addition. The gloss was occasioned by'the feeling that the peril by which thelives of Zion's children was endangered needed to be stated. It rested, however, on the mistaken view that the children were those of tender age, whose pitiful condition has come before Us in n, 12. But presumably they are the inhabitants as a whole, and the situation reflected is that after the fall of the city, not during the privations ofthe siege; Y 2 324 LAMENTATIONS 2. to Pour out thine heart like water before the: face: of the Lord: "¦ •''•-''= ''!"-'n Lift up thy hands toward him for the life cf thy young children, o;;< ' ¦¦¦> o i i r That faint for hunrge^at the tofj o£ every street.' ao See, O Lord, and behold, to whom thou hast done !¦¦ -aa ttvus!,<: ! '!;.'':-' M? n] .,. Shall the women eat their fruit, the children that are dandled in the hands ? Shall the.prie$t and the prophet be slayjin the sanctuary of the Lord ? The) line- is based on 12, iv. 1 ; cf. Isa. 1. 20, Nah. iii. low Ball thinks that ' for the life of thy young children ' was originally ' for what he hath done unto thee.' at the beginning of the watches i at the beginning of each of the three watches into which the night was at this time divided. As the watchman utters his cry, the sleeper is aroused, called back from the oblivion of slumber to the bitter realities of life. Pour out thine heart : cf. n. The hands were uplifted in prayer, which was often uttered in a loud, voice. 20. Zion, in obedience to the poet's behest, utters her prayer to God, or rather a remonstrance with Him for the, desolation He has wrought. The questions are rhetorical, they do not plead that the horrors enumerated shall not happen ; "they have" happened already ; is God to be indifferent to them ? For the first cf. the hideous story of the siege of Samaria, 2 Kings vi. 25-301 That matters would come to this extremity in the siege is foretold in Deut. xxviii. 53, cf. Jer. xix. 9, Lev. xxvi. 29. The closing words at the end of the second line are added to heighten the pitifulness of the description by a reference to the helpless infancy of'the victims, and the fond affection which in happier days had been lavished, upon them by those who. are now driven by desperate hunger to so unnatural a deed. To this outrage on natural sancti ties the poet adds an outrage on the sanctities of religion. Pre sumably the reference is to the butchery of priests, and prophets in the Temple by the Babylonians after the capture of the city. The place of the priest was in the Tenlple ; the prophets may haye takeri refuge in it, believing (cf. Rev. ad. 1, a) that it at least could not be taken by the enemy. LAMENTATIONS 2. 21— 3. 1 325 The youth and the old man lie on the ground in the « streets; '.'..,.., My virgins and my young men are fallen by the sword : Thou hast slain them in the day of thine anger; thou hast.s^iighterejj, andnat pitied. Thou hast tailed, as in the day of a solemn assembly, 23 amy ^errors on every side, And there was none that escaped or remained in the day ofthe I^ord's anger : ".'-'; Those that I have dandled and brought up hath mine enemy consumed. I am the man that hath seen-afflictipri by: the rod of his 3 . wrath. ' " ' "'. ','',' - -, " See Jer. vi, 25. - ,,,? 21. Further description .of the butchery, which spared! neither; age nor sex. , . -. j 22. The R.V. means that Yahweh has summoned all the terrors of war, plague, and famine to effect the ruin of Jerusalem ; He has called them as if to a festival, a festival of carnage from which none has escaped. But it is also possible, following the LXX, to take the word rendered 'terrors' to mean 'hamlets.' The point is in that case that the inhabitants of the surrounding districts have been summoned to Jerusalem, and thus their fate also has been sealed, so that .none have survived (so Ewaldand Lehr). , But, tire, parallel with the Jeremianic phrase 'Terror round about' favours the R.V. rendering, and, as Budde points "put, Zjoij -in the last line; simply laments the loss of her own inhabitants.-, -..;,- IiL 1-66. The. Third Elegy. This poem is generally regarded, and with justice, as below the level of Lam. i in poetic value, and still more below that of ii and iv. It is of the same length as i and ii, but whereas in these the first of each triad of lines begins with the letter required -by the alphabetic scheme, in this each line of the triad begins with that letter • moreover -the lines of. the triad are less; closely knit' together hy.icommunity of subject-matter. ¦ The exigencies of this artificial scheme have been to some extent responsible, for the literary inferiority of the composition. 3«fi , ^LAMENTATIONS '.35^ i i-.He hath led me and' caused ".me to walk, in darisness a and not in light. : 9 Or,- without lights i.'ij'j- ¦ 1'j'Jiiri A . — j 10 '•¦iil^ -:i', :,1 0!'Sl:'i iiii'. •:.<•. i liljwil''' The question that arouses the keenest discussion is that^pf the. identity of the speaker. ' That>he'%'an"individuailiUffSrer'lS held by several,, especially, Budde end.inow LPhr j that, he speak?' in the name of the communityj or ,-that the community itself ,is the speaker, is held by a considerable- number' of recent 'writers. Budde.'s'advbcacy.of the individual identification is' very interest ing in view of his strong vindication of the national interpretation ofthe Servant of Yahwehv Some of .the featuresio the poem speak strongly for it, e.g. i and 27 ; also the change to: the plural in 40- 47, where the metaphors are more suitable, to^the experiences of & people than in the rest of the chapter.' TTie representation of the people as a man, in view of its representation elsewhere as feminine, is also improbable;: The inclusion in this book, which is concerned with the miseries of the nation, no doubt constitutes a presumption that here also the nation is the subject.' But from this we can argue only as to the interpretation placed on the poems by the compiler, not as to that intended by its author. And even so far as the compiler is concerned, if he. regarded Jeremiah as theauthdrof the 1'amenta'tibhS*,' fie'-might we'll have ihchrde'd a ptfem which he took to be a description ofjeremiah's personal experi ence's ; the community of authorshiprather' thafiof sUDJecf^isthyrng its combination with etegies-on the nation. !o ¦''The1 Question has' passed into a'; hew stage with Lohr's more rdceht' inye'stigatrdhs in Stade's Zeitschjft' for 1964; He'thihks' that'the poerfr' reflects incb'risiste'nt 'situations' (1-^24 .aM' ik-%8j also 48-51 and 52-66). He points out tha't'cf occurs* as aquoraflbfc in Ps. cxliii, but there it' iiiri its' original form, here it''ha's'"'bfct'§ alferedto suit the acrostic s'criehie' He ihfers that 1-24 cotttkins' SuBstantiallJr the Psalm .from which 'the author of Ps. cx^i, quoted,: but ¦ as we have it, it has been turned into' an acrostic Iby the author of our chapter: --52^66'coHtaihs a 'second Psalm','in Which also the speaker is an individual, and which .has similarly been turned by the author^ into an acrostic.' 25-50* contains the author's own contribution,., and most clearly betrays his; intenfiortTto represent the speaker as undertaking:the rdle of Jeremiahi > This theory is persuasively, stated by Ltihr, and it is by no means improbable that, as Several scholars have thought, the'poet speaks' in the character of Jeremiah. It is also the case that the- comV position 'does seem jnot 'to. hang: together: ^throughout. Still the explanation offered is in anyccase somewhatlspeculativej.and the theory as to origin' a little difficult to accept. Moreover, the pre sent writer cannot admit all the references to Jeremiah pointed LAMENTATIONS > 3.' 3-6 337 Surely against me rje turneth his hand again and again 3 all the aayl" ".''.''" ' .''','"' ' .7"...-. " •"•'.'! > vr: '"'"if. "I .' ": "My flesh and my skiri hsttK he ^ made old 5 he hath 4 broken my bones. 1 He-hath builded against me, and compassed' me With g b gall and travail. .., c.. ¦:•,.-,'. u. j;o^ie. hath; made! me to dwell, in. dark places,?fas, .tbpse 6. that have been long dead. * ^Or, w/omont ,.J See Deut. xxix. 18. i^^SeejPs,, cxliii: 3. , ; out by Lohr to be really such. But he has rightly called attention to phenomena 'which deserve consideration. ' '''-" ''-'*' '• '¦¦-'• wen in, nis anger ;- ci.c ior -me expression isa; x. -5, miuugii t.hc reference here is wider, Ps. lxxxix. 32. It is npfewprfjiy that Yahweh is unnamed, but precarious, to infer that the author wrote this elegy.as a continuation of Lam. ii. 'Jam.theman ' would not form a good .continuation to, ii. 22, where ZSion .sp&aks as a woman,, Cf. 'for a-similar 'reference to God without naming. Hipi Job^iiii 20 (see note). Thisi pontinues throughout 1-1,6, where:the author's describing God's hard dealings ; also in the prayes,i7-2i, where Xve, have the secondperspnal pronoun, but no direcbaddress to Yahweh. Onlywhen from title depressing recital of the! miseries irtflistadby Him andthe pitiful entreaty, the writer begins to speak of Hisigopdr ness and me?cy, does he abandon the pronoun for the nameitself, 4. From the general statements of 1 -3, 'the author, now, passes to a detailed description of hia miseries under: tnany -figures* frequently of a conventional character, drawn especially from, Job and the.Psalms. " .. , .. -j\ . '""' : made old : or :'. worn away' :: The constant tribulations have worn him to a shadow. -' ;_;¦ -. ' - __'' broken my hones* cf.Isa. xxxviii. 13, Ps.: h. 8, Jer . J- i7> .-: 5. The strange combination: 'gall and travaiL' suggests that, the tex^is in d sorter. Since the word rendered,/ gall '.also means Aead ' it-is natural, that several should take it so here and' emend thetext The simplest suggestibn: is that of Praetonus, and,com- Dassedtny head.Jth travail^ :Bbt this does not yields felicitous sSsf Ere -other suggestions -more, fortunate SobleusJier's emendation 'gall and wormwood' would avoid the incongruous comb^tfon^^enttext^., ^ The — ^ corapares bls 328 LAMENTATIONS 3. ^13 i He hath fenced me about, that I cannot go forth; he hath made my chain heavy. 8 Yea, when! cry and call for help, he shutteth out my prayer. • 9 He hath fenced up. my ways with hewn stone, he hath made my paths crooked io He is unto me asabearlying in wait, asalion in secret places. n He hath turned aside my ways, and pulled me in pieces; he hath made me desolate. i a He hath bent his bow, and set me as a mark for tbe arrow < ... '3 He hath caused the a shafts of his quiver to enter into my reins. * Heb. s;6nf. wretched lot to that ofthe dead who dwell in the gloomy recesses of Sheol. It is not clear whether 'we should render as R.V. or substitute ' those that are for ever dead.' In the latter case the point seems to be the hopelessness of any return to a happier state ; in the former case the point might be that the dead of the primaeval era dwelt in exceptionally dark regions of Sheol. A reference to, the exceptionally wicked antediluvians' might be intended. Ps. lxxxviii. 4^6, 16-12 may be compared.* 1. Cf. Job xix. 8. This' chapter seems to have been in- the writer's mind : for 5 cf. Job xix. 12 ; for 8 cf. Job xix. 7. Here a double metaphor is used to describe his loss of freedom ; his way is blocked, and his heavy chain fetters his movements. 1 8.' The speaker complains, as Job does (xix. 7, xxx. 20), that God refuses to hear his prayer. , Bi The meaningseems to be that God has piled blocks of hewn stone in his way; and thus driven him into by-paths which lead in a wrong direction. •K».' For a similar combination of lion and bear cf. Hos. xiii. 8. Possibly this : verse '.carries, on the figure of 9; driven into the winding bywwaysj.he falls into the clutches of beasts of prey. . 11. Fdr the first clause cf. 9 ; the second perhaps takes up the metaphor of 16. '¦:•--, -, ¦,-,;.. . ,;,.,,- 12, 13. Job xvi. 12, 13 seems to:be in the , author's mind; c£ also vi. 4. ..11^ . ,-'. , , , LAMENTATIONS 3. 14-30 329 I am become a derision to all my people ; and their 14 song all tbe day. He hath filled me with bitterness, he hath sated me with 15 , wormwood. He hath also broken my teeth with gravel stones, he 16 hath covered me with ashes. ' .And thou hast "removed my soul far off from peace; 17 I forgat prosperity. And I said, My strength is perished, and mine expeqta- l8 tion from the Lord. Remember mine affliction and my *> misery, the worm- 19 wood and the gall. "My soul hath them still in rern^m^rancpjiand is boiyed 20 "j^down within me. A -'. ¦ • ¦--;-. * Or, cast off b Or, wandering 'C«r, outcast slate 14. The verse recalls Jer. xx. 7, 8s cf. Job xii. 4, xxx. irO; Pstlxix. ir, 12. A variant reading for fffly people' is 'peoples.' The-eheice "between them largely' depends on the ;view taken as - 'the Question whether the speaker -is am individual, or the nation. IS. Cf. Job ix. 18, Jer. ix, 15. ' * 16. Cf. Prov. xx. 17. - Whether- the meaning is that gravelus mixed with his bread, or that he is fed with gravel instead of bread - (cf. Matt. vii. 9), is not clear. The correctness ofthe texthas been doubted. -Cheyne suggests 'And I girded sackcloth on my flesh; Trolled myself in ashes ' {Enc. Bib. 2699), -"' 17. thou hast removed. The second person ls-strange in this description, since iip to this point the third person. has been used. The rendering « my soul is rejected' is possible^but in view of,3i and Ps.4xxxviii. 14 improbable. . The LXX reads 'he has removed,' and this is probably to be accepted. Ball suggests ' And he ''•'> t-i/1f, <¦' '(fji V soul that seeketh him. , . • , . 26 If is good that a man should "h^e^and, quietly wait for the salvation of the Lord. ' a? j.Itis gDodiforia'iria*! that hebeati the yoke in his youth. , , SI. This. The structure favours.- the reference, to what -has "' prer/eded; rjtrt'it is:rhbraiisiifiiable1to '¦!re1er1'ii tb'the beautiful de scription which follows, in spite of the awkwardness involved in breaking into the alphabetic group of three verses to which 21 belongs. ' His hope is in'spireo* by remembrance Sf God's unfailing mercy. ... : 22, .83.: There are some metrical irfegttlaritie&in-^hese verses. Forthefirst person we,-sho«ldjPKobat)ly read the third: (so Targum andi Syriac), and • oim%feth?^L '(because,''., reuderingj* The. 1 Lo.rri*s mercies>are_,ncifcspeiit»,ii his compassions fail no.t*',r .Since th# first part of 23 is too short, we might .transfer 'his. compassions 'to this verse 'New, every rflorning^re, his cdmpapsio»§ j^oiieading^jiey fail not?, inoaai v,;n-'.-,. ..> -i »¦¦¦ ir. ... ro-,ba«ral *id n ;;'•• blxu-,, 24. Cf. ; P& xvi. 5, ,lxxiiii,26j cxix. SlWRtii-aB, t> j- .- )!>-M ,}m, 25S-27. "E*ch Verse-of this group begins^wjthcithe^ebrewiji^p rendered 'good,' which strikes its key-nols;. -s )?iret we, hayift-an expression of faith in God's goodness (25), which encourages a-man to wait patienfily, Jot Godi's deliyerance even in;the .midst of sufforr ing (26),. whichhe isjhetter enabled to bear becausehe recognize? the moral/value bf$headisjcipljnefl27), Lohr aptly cpmpares/itpm, V.-3-5.- bn" A ¦ ,"-M3;jsaa I! . . ,,b:./,i-j. , ¦ < ¦',,;:,¦,, , <.Si.-, 26. The Hebrew is difficult, but the R.V. gives what must be the general sense, intended. . Cf. Ps. xxxvii. 7, xK:4,''J^ii..i,- jer. xvli- 7- _ ¦ ¦•"i iii-.ir.r;] j , rrj.^u .,ai't»wu. ..,-¦¦ 27. The inference of J. O. Micftaelisftbat the/Setse; was written by a young matt has no cogency." ift might eveftibetter be argued thatiit,is. the, judgement of a-man no,lajiger youngs ilpokjng, hsolf from the vantage-ground ;. Let him put his mouth in the dust ; if so be there may 29 iU-3 behope,, kI ^i:, ,,.._. ,;il n, .iSHr ,ft3yd„8 oT ,. Let him give his cheek to him that smiteth him ;; let him 30 be filled full with reproach. ' For the Lord will not cast off, forever.,- ao r, , j 3i For though he cause griefc yet .will he, have, corrnpa^sjon 32 according to the multitude of his mercies. For he doth not .afflict D willingly^ ,nor_ .gpeye , the 33 children of men. S*.1U>. iit* -' Or, He sitteth alone &>c. (vv. 2S-30) 'b Heb. from hid heart. the fine: exposition ofthe thought in Heb; xii. 7-i;i, .i Thgreajdjng ' f fiorn 4jis youth' found in several Hebrew J\JSStumel}! from his fellows. For 28 cf. i. %, ii. 10, Jerv.xVi. li-j.- Krir, ,. v.-,: ¦ < 29. There is no parallel in the Old Tes.tament,;to .Jjictfost clause; the attitude of prostration with, the face oivthe ground, is a. typically Oriental. expression of complete, and silent submission^ Theiphrase. ' to lick : the dost' :importS;aa?:abject element into, the. surrender. . r,,j ,-,30. Cfi Isa< 1.6, in a; soliloquy by the Servant; of Yahweh ; Matt. v. 39; also .Job xvi. io.»^a? , .lom ,,: -.-;.,. ... lY._, -_. .; ^,,-,,-li .";;,.' ¦ r^a-r33. The dumb submjsgjon enjpined in , 28^30 is reqommisnd- ed py.the; assurance that *jfa|^eh^ rejection 'pf the suffeBeriwil.l-fiPt b^pe/hianent (31), since HJS, mer|y[,jvill ultimatel^incjing HA® Jo compassion (32}, for it is frorn^d^jljght.in infj'i^tijigspa^hafoj^ ei^s^isesthe- children of men,, j^g,B a-.-.h.i i to"! frassar- 31.' Cf. Ps. xxx. s (see R.V. ntarg:), lxxvii. 7-10, ciii.9, Isas,h?ii. ^6jjM4.c. vii. i8„ Several scjjqlars jthink; that on rjtejric^'gr^ugds Ae-Tverse. is. too short. ^•'Xjiei easiest suggestion is,.,t%, insert '^iap' as the object, but,f^jldre|i of mepVwould;rbe1,T(ess|,,b3jA l^ajli-suggests, ':his spul,'-cf .big emendation ojf 17. ,K, . .,,hab«*: 332 LAMENTATIONS 3. 34-39 34 To crush underfoot all the' prisoners of the earth, 35 To turn aside the right of a man before the faeS ¦¦>.¦.; .¦.-'. ¦-.¦¦, - •.'¦,..¦.;. 39. This sentence is difficult. Some take it to contain question and answer, 'Of what should' a living man complain! ' Each' (should complain) of his sins." Probably, however, the R.V' • rendering is preferable; the meaning being that man should not LAMENTATIONS 3. 40-44 333 Let us search and try our ways, and turn again to the 46 Lord. Let us lift up out heartJwith our hands UrttoGo'd in the 41 heavens. ' "We have trahsgi-essfed' and have rebelled ,J thofi hast 4* not pardoned. Thou ha3tfa<>OTerad.with .anger, and pursued us; thou 43 hast slain, thou hast not pitied- Thou hast covered thyself with a cloud, that our grayer 44 should not pass through. a f Or, coverecl thyself indulge in murmurs at his misfortunes, they are the penalty for his sin. The word rendered ' the punishment of his sins' more commonly, it is true, means 'sin,' and this favours the former interpretation. But since the two previous verses of the, group contain, questions without answers, it is more symmetrical to adopt the same here.' The point of the adjective ' living ' is not clear. It may be, so long as a man has life, he has no reason for complaint; his punishment falls short of the death which is the due meed of his sins, (For an emendation by Cheyne see Enc. Bib. 2699.) 40-42. The recognition that suffering is due to sin (39) should lead to self-examination and repentance (40), followed by prayer (41) and penitent confession (42). 41. Lifting of hands was a common gesture in ancient prayer. But the formalexercise, to be effective, must carry the heart with it. Perhaps the thought is, let us offer our heart on our hands, i.e. present the whole heart to God in prayer. 42. The last clause constitutes a transition to the next group. 43. With this verse a description of the miseries of the people begins, which continues to 47. covered. According to the R.V. text, the meaning is that God has overwhelmed His people with anger and pursued them. But this can hardly be the meaning; we should have expected the order of the verbs to be inverted, and the following verse suggests that We should render, as in the margin, ,' covered thyself J^ He had clothed Himself in His fiery indignation and pursued His peaplk slaying without mercy. . 44. That God dwelt in clouds and darkness is a thought which 334 LAMENTATIONS^ 3. ViH i 4§ Thou hast made us as the offscqurjng and refuse in'the midst of the peoples. 46 All our enemies have opened tbeir mouth widejagainst^ us- T."^V 47 . ,$ear and the pit are come upon us, ad^vastajipq and destruction. ,: . ,\,\-< ¦•'-.< a 48 Mine eye runneth down with rivers of water, for the ' '"'''de^feuctibri' of'the daughter* of m'y people, 'i ' ''¦''¦ 49 ,,,Mmq .eye pftujethidown, and.ceaseth not, without any intermission, ,. , " '.,. 50 Till the Lord look down", arid behold from heaven. 51 Mine eye affectetn'friy soul,' because of all the daughters of my city. *, Or; tumult frequently i-ecui?s in Hebrew poetry, where it is used with the fiheSpierfeetsU Here the thought" is • that God has thus wrapped Himself in cloud that the prayerof His people may not penetrate tti Him.- ' ¦• ¦ •' '- ¦ ¦• - --- 1. , - .:-.-? • 45. Cf. i Cot." iv. 13. The meaning -is that Israel is reduced to a position ofthe utmost humiliation in the sight of .the nations ; of. 14. 46. Taken 'from ii. 16'. 47. Fear and the pit : see on Jer, xlviii. 43. There is a slighter assonance in the Hebrew in the- latter, part of the verse* wh'ieH'is' imitated in- the R.V, '" , '¦>¦ ...*. ¦48. 'Cf. i. 16, Jer. xiii. .1715 a still oloser parallel to, the first clause is found in Ps. cxix. 136, for thelast clause see ii.:ii. iThis verse is connected with the next group by the" reference. to 'mine eye,*"-'*p-' 1 "':.:.' ¦"- ' - 49-51. Lohr rightly-points out' that 50 would- stand better at the end ofthe group thansr, and suggests that the original order may have"been5i, '49,:jJQ. :j) .V.:'" 49. For'theincessantweeping'Gf. Jer. ix. i. ! • .,••->* 51. The sense is obscurely; Expressed. The first clause' is generally taken to mean that the constant Weeping, has inflamed M.3t eyes and is causing him physical pain, 'rmy.soul' meaning simply-" myself.' The remainder? of the verse has,, been very variously interpreted ; the sense is probably that the sufferings of the women 'of Jer-usateffl'have caused him to Weep thus incessantly. LAMENTATIONS: S. ^-59 335 They have chased me sore like a bird, .thai; ai^mine h enemies without cause. They have cut off nry life in the' dungetiri, and have cast 53 a stone upon me. '¦'¦''' ¦' 'Waters flowed over mine head ; I said; I; am' cuf: off. 54 I called upon -thy name, 0, , Lord, out of, t% lowest 55 dungeon. Thou, heardest my voice; hide not thine ear at my 56 " breathing, at my cry: : '" -' '"; ''"'''''•-• j' ¦*¦"•'"' t'e Thou drewest near in the day thai;1? calledniplari thee : 57 ' thou 'saiidst,'Feaf hot. '' r '- ' - ' ''im-v!'! O^ordjthpu hast: pleaded the, causes of my soulj.^hou 58 hast redeemed my life. >,». , . H , , ,,,. _ ' * - '-' - ' r ¦ ' ¦'- - ''- v' 1 ' - .- J._'i ' 'J O Lord, thou hast seen my wrong j judge thou my 59 cause. - -i ;;.:; ;.' - 52. The speaker turns now to his own afflictions, of which he gives a metaphorical' description. That the language is figurative is clear hr 52, but we should probably take the reference to imprisonment in the dungeon in the same way. ' If the poet had Jeremiah'spxperiences inmftld he has not kept closely to them ; 54 in particular had no counterpart in'the experience described in Jer, xxxviii. 6-13, but is excjnded by the fact that there was no water in his dungeon^ A stone- inay -have" been placed over themouth of the pit in which he -was confined, but we nave no reference to it in the story. The words may mean, however, '.have cast, stones at me,' and this would be quite inconsistent with any reference in the clause to Jeremiah's experience. Ball, however/ reads for 53b ' They brought me down to Abaddon,' an attractive but not' quite easy emendation. The figures of pursuit by hunters, of confinement in dungeons, of waters going over the head, are quite common es^Sciaily 'in the Psalms. *'""'*'' , 55-57^ The speaker; looks back at his, prayer hi the dungeon and' God's response. Verse jsfi1', 'hide not ... cry,' seerri's' to contain the gist of the prayer uttered in the dungeon. ' 58. The speaker is1 still looking back" on an experience which has come to an end. Yahweh has acted as his advocate intihe law- court and secured a verdict for His client. ".' ', 59-66. Now the speaker passes' from the former situation 33*5 LAMENTATIONS 3. 6b— 4. i 6o Thou hast seen all their vengeance and all their devices against tne. 6i Thou hast heard their reproach, O Lord, and all their devices against me ; , , . - 62 The lips of those that rose up against me, and their imagination against me all the day. 63 Behold thou : their sitting down, and their rising tip ; I am their song. 64 Thou wilt render unto them a recompence, O Lord, . . according to the work iof, their hands. 65 Thou wilt give them a hardness pf heart, thy curse unto them. 66 Thou wilt pursue them in anger, and destroy them1 frbm under the. heavens of the Lord. 4 How is the gold become dim ! how is the most pure gold changed!" r r* i-Or, blindness. - Heb. covering. which he has been describing, and invokes Yahweh's help against the enemies from whom he is at present suffering. 62. lips: i. e. utterances. , It is governed by ' thou hast heard' in 61. 63. sitting down and rising np : cf. Ps. cxxxix. 2 ; if is a com prehensive expression for a man's life in general. For the last clause cf. 14. 64. Cf. Ps. xxviii. 4. 65. thy curse unto them: to be taken as an imprecation, not as dependent on ' give.' iv. 1-22. The Fourth Elegy. This chapter is an acrostic poem, which adopts the same alpha betic order as ii and iii. It is, however, shorter than the first three poems, since each alphabetic group consists of two lines only instead of three. It is very closely related in content to the second elegy, and probably proceeds from the same author. Points of contact between the two poems are the emphasis on the responsibility of the religious leaders for the catastrophe, and the compassion felt for the sufferings of the children. Each poem LAMENTATIONS 4. 2 337 The stories of the sanctuary, are poured out at the top of every street. ....> ¦, The precious sons of Zion,. <> eorripaf able to fine gold, ,3 a Heb. that may be weighed against. seems to have been written by. an eye-witness.; There js also a similarity in the arrangement, according to which both fall into^ two main sections. The differences even more strongly Suggest " unity of authorship, since the two poems are' apparently designed to Jbe mutually complementary. For the date seethe Introduction to it The poem opens with a contrast between the former glory of Zion's sons and their present wretchedness. " This is. illustrated by the unnatural cruelty of the. mothers to their children, and the ' miserable condition of those once surrounded with luxury. Their sin must be greater than Sodom's, since their lingering 'agony is - so much worse than Sodom's' swift overthrow. The poet then describes once more the extremities to which famine has reduced the- nobles, and the unnatural deeds it has caused the mothers to commit. So terrible, so unexpected a punishment, is due to the sins of priests and prophets, who are as unclean as lepers, through the shedding of innocent blood. Then the poet speaks of the vain hopes of help from Egypt; and passes on to describe the closing period of the siege, and the. capture of the lung. He/closes with a bitter reference to Edom's exultation, predicting, that ben turn will come, while the "sin of Zipn is now fully, expiated, _>. .,; iv. 1. The fine gold and the stones are npt to be taken literally, but, as a -'explains, they "are the citizens * of Zion. The word rendered 'is become dim' occurs nowhere else:; if the text is correct this translation may be 'accepted. The verb rendered '-is changed' has an Aramaic form, its correctness is dubious; NOldeke -and LOhr point differently and read 'is become odious', -but Bickell's suggestion that we should deletethe last consonant and take the word as an adjective meaning 'old' (yashdn) is preferable: ' How -is the ancient gold become dim the most pure gold1.' Cheyne's suggestion ' Sheba's gold ' is not so easy. stones of the sanctnary. Wfrmighf alsorender ' holy stones.' But neither is satisfactory $ the representation that si. the street corners the stones of the Temple Were poured out is too improbable even in a metaphor. The sense required is ' precious stones ; ' Budde gains it by emendation; ethers think the presenrtext may he so interpreted! "' '-'•' . .,' ' '' "* 2. The-^xplanation of 1 : the fine gold is the precious sons of Zioii ¦ they too are the precious stones, esteemed' of no More" Worth • than croekery made of common olay.: '¦;'¦ y-.-^--\ •' II z 358 LAMENTATIONS ' 4, 3-6 . How are they esteemed as earthen •. pitchers, the work of the hands of the potter ! ; Even the jackals draw out the breast, they give suck to their young ones ; ,. The daughter of my people is become cruel, like, the ostriches in the wilderness. t The tongue of the sucking child cleaveth to- the; roof of his mouth for thirst : . The" young children ask bread, and rio man breaketh it unto them. ; They that did feed delicately are desolate in the streets : They that were brought up in scarlet embrace dunghills. 5 For a the iniquity of the daughter of my people is greater than v the sin of Sodom, ~ . ; ,.\ • Or, the punishment ofthe iniquity : ¦ - b Or, the punishment of the sin •i",i ' 3. The jackals, contemptible and greedy leasts of p!rey as they are, suckle their whelps; but Judah has" become cruel like. the ostrich. For the 'cruelty' of the ostrich cf. Job-xxxixitf^i? (with the notes'). But the idea that "Judah is cruel to her childreri is not what we expect,'nor very intelligible.^ We expect rather-that the mothers have pnder the pressure of famine become unnatural to their, little ones, as the ostrich, toiler yoOng.; It isbettee, there fore,, to> read ' the daughters ofumy people are become cruel '.1 (so Bickell, Budde). The change to the more familiar ' daughter-of my people ', was very natural. ..1. ¦--¦..¦:-•¦ 4, The -two lines refer; to, children in different , stages. The mother withholds her breast from the child who can.take no other food.; while the children that can,itthough still unweaned, eat bread, have no one who, will share thescanty supply with them. Cf. ii. 12. . ,-- ,>...!•-'-. ¦_!.¦. 1.. v.-- -¦¦¦.. .5. It is disputed whetherithe reference is-stilhto the children so delicately nurtured' and ;daintjly clad, or to the rich. people generally,: without reference to age. "The second line favours the former, viewj if it is correctly rendered in R.V.;: b.utiBeveral •prefer to, translate: ' borne on>sS8rIeti!:i..e,,r,eelining on touches ibr litters upholstered with stuffs dyed scarlet and' itherefore, very •costly, ,.This>favgurs the Jattervjew.- 1 There as aoioogent reason ,for choosing eifher<;ir,..;i. .,, . ¦¦< ¦ -¦i<-,\ ,•„[ ,:; , .,,. ,••,-: 6. The text is probably to he, preferred, to the margin.. That LAMENTATIONS' 4i tV 339 •'• 'That was overthrown as in a moment, and no haRds "' ' a were laid upon her. -'Her ° nobles. were purer than snow, they were whiter 7 than milk, ¦ , -They were more ruddy, in body- than -o rubies, their : polishing was as of sapphire : ... = »j .Their visage is d blacker than a.? coal ; they are not 8 known in the streets : : Their skin cleaveth to their bones; -it is withered, it is become like a stick. They that be slain with the sword are better than they 9 that be slain with hunger; > - . For these e pine away, stricken through, for want of the . fruits of the field. '-Or, fell See a Sam. iii, 29. b Or, Nasirites _ p +Or, ..corals -Heb. darker than blackness; ' e Heb y flow dvpqyZ-. the sin of Judah is greater- than that of Sodom (cf. Ezek. xvi. 47-30, Matt. xi. 33, 24), follows from the difference in their fate ; Sodom fell by a sudden catastrophe, and did not linger in pain ; Judah perished in- a long-drawn-out - agony, from Which no cir cumstance of horror,- indignity, cruelty, and privation was missing. no hands were laid upon" her s more literally 'no hands whirled round about her.? The meaning is apparently that 'Sodom fell at the hand of God. Some render7 ' none wrung their hands ;"' i. e.' the Catastrophe was too swift to leave time' for thisii Ball reads, -".and their ruin tarried not*' ; : *7, 8. In a striking contrast the poet brings out the difference be"tween the appearance of the nobles in their time of < luxurious lining:: and in the privations of the "siege.: Then they were fair, Handsome, and' well-nourished V'now^unrecognizable, they are so black -and shrivelled (cf. Job xxx.'3o);'and reduced: to skin and bofeef '3, . , i ¦ ¦¦ » 00 - , 3iii nohles: •¦ the>: primary meaningbf the word is a* Nasirites ; butitibearsthe'widersenseihere.- >.:¦¦ , j -- - •-=-•¦ Z 2 340 LAMENTATIONS 4. icwi3 10 The hands of, the pitiful women have sodden their own children; They were their meat in the destruction of the daughter of my people. 1 r The Lord hath accomplished his fury, he hath poured out his fierce anger; i . And he hath kindled a fire in Zion, which hath devoured the foundations thereof. , 12 The kings of the earth believed not, neither all the in habitants of the world, ...... ,That the adversary and the enemy should enter into the gates of Jerusalem. ..-?, ¦_¦. 13 Itis because of the sins of her prophets* and the iniqui ties of her priests, ?!-.¦ 9. The swift death on the. battlefield was better than the slow death by famine. In the second line Ball reads, ' For they, they passed away with a stab -suddenly in the field.' The Hebrew is unusual, and the text has often been suspected., . 10. Cf. . ii. ao.,_ Hunger t drives even the pitiful, affectionate motheris to Jhis desperate extremity. ,.:..,:.'¦:¦ 11. The language ofthe second line is, of course, metaphorical 12. The meaning is not that Jerusalem was too strongly forti fied to be captured. The author, as is the case with other Hebrew writers, thinks of the nations as sharing the fanatical belief of the Jews, so often rebuked .by Jeremiah, in the inviolability of Zion. This conviction, Which went back to the preaching of Isaiah;: had been greatly strengthened by the deliverance of the capital from capture ;by Sennacherib in 70,1 b. c, while the peopled assurance of its good standing with Yahweh. had been confirmed, -by. its acceptance of the Deuteronomic Law. Henee.,:the possibility that Yahweh might be, so angry with His people that He would even destroy .His. own city, as Micah had threatened in words long remembered by the people (;see Jer. xxvi. 17-19 with the notes), seemed to have passed away. The writer of it his verse had Obviously held this belief, agafnst which Jeremiah so solemnly protested. He could not therefore be identified with Jeremiah, -ts. It is notewoMhy-jthat thei.poetfixestheirespnnsibiltty for Zion s fate on her religious leaders. So Jeremiah had singled out the priests, and prophets) (Jer- v. 31, vL:J8, xxiii< nJEtV The accusation in the second line adds, a feature in/ the- indictment, LAMENTATIONS 4. i4, 15 341 That have shed the blood of the just in the midst of her. ' Theywander as blind men in the streets, they are pol- 14 luted with blood, So that men cannot touch their garments. Depart ye, they cried unto them, Unclean ! depart, de- 15 part, touch not : which is not directly attested elsewhere. The narrative in Jer. xxvi is hardly relevant, since their desire to kill Jeremiah was due to special causes; and Jehoiakim seems to have been most to blame for the execution of Uriah. The construction of the verse is a little difficult. It does not connect with .14, and obviously not with 12. We may either suppose that it connects with n, the insertion of 12 between them being due to the exigencies of the acrpstic scheme (so Lohr) , or treat it as an independent sentence (so R.V.). The latter is much better, and we must either supply a verb (as R.V.) or preferably insert one in the Hebrew, e.g. ' they have entered ' {bd?ju)b which might easily have fallen out after ' her, prophets ' (so- Budde). The metre gains by the insertion. 14. The passage is not quite clear; the R.V. gives the. probable sense. The verse places us in the last days of Jerusalem. These priests and prophets wander blindly in the streets; they are polluted with the innocent blood they had shed in the time: of their power, so that men shrink from them as they stagger by, lest they should contract ceremonial . defilement from their gar ments. - „ . -. ¦'".-' . as blind men. L6hr suspects a gloss. But there is a real point in the phrase. It depicts the helpless perplexity which has overtaken these rulers, once so confident and moving with such directness to their goal along an unscrupulous road. . Now the ground is .giving way beneath their feet and their universe tumbling in ruin about their ears. • IS Here those who shrank from contact with these blood stained murderers (14), call out to them to leave the city on accolmt of their uncleanness. The reference in ' Unclean 1' seems to be to the cry of the leper t(Lev. xm. 45>- * is no objection to this that it is the people, not the unclean person who utter the cry. It is just the point that tbe people; do, ut er it. The murderTrs, since they were not lepers would obviously not feel under any obligation to declare themselves unclean. But the reopte hurl the cry at them, execrating them as no better than tepers whose touch brought ceremonial pollution and whose, lot 342 LAMENTATT0NBV*4.! i6, 17 ¦-., "I When they fled'away and wandered, nien said. am bng the nations, They shall no more sojourn here'M 16 The bangefl-of the Lord hath divided them ; he will no more regard them : - ->'-¦ ¦• They respected: not the persons of -the. priests, -"they ,- : .'j , favoured' not the elders; ' •-' ¦/¦--'¦>. /-.-/ p.p.(p ; 17 Our eyes do yet fail in looking for- our vain help'!4 "Or, Yea b Heb. face. if was' to be hpurttiSd -from': the society of men. The'lVerse1 is overladen.^ In the first line the words ,;they cried until them "are apbareritly' an. explanatory gloss, and the' repetition of 'dep&rV in the' sfecofo'd half ofthe liheis due' t o'ditfography.- - The second line in,Jits pre'serk- text'seerhs to mean ; that- Sve* -after they "had left Jerusalem and fled to foreign! countries, they were hot- peTnlittea 16 settle' down.' ¦ -But it is "too teflg.1 The's'implest expedient is to Strike' biit ' they said* Which' is^an explanatory gloss1 like that in the first line.'"' PeriiapS-we should 'also omit 'among' the nations,? which may have been a marginal glossl^on 16s. -But the text is also corrupt. The"; Word" rendered r!,,fled' away-' {ndtsu). occurs nowhere else*, aii'd -its serise is verydiibioii's. Lohr reads; ' When they "were pleaSed (rafea) to wander. ? But this Spoilsthe asson ance .mother Original ; moreover- one is so forcibly reminded, in reading -the Hebrew, Of Gen,- iv. 12, 14, that we instinctively correct the text ih-aecprdance with itand substitute nddu, which requires no alteration in the English rendering." Thus the' fate of Cain falls on those who were guilty of his sin. A cleVerbut foo-drastic^restefationJof 14;- 15 by Cheyne may be seen in the Enc. Bib. 2700; '•'•?'¦¦ ., . •'•''. 16. The fate of' the murderers. Yahweh Himself has.scattered them ; they are driven like Cain from His presence ; priests and elders: though th'ey- were, no respect was shown to them. 'For 'elders' we should have expected ' prophets \". the LXX reads this,'and'in spite' of the suspicion: that the easier text arouses, it ihay be the original which has " been altered in the Hebrew through the influence of v. 12. 'The anger of the LOBD : literally ' the face of Yahweh,' which perhaps means rather 'Yahweh Himself 5? cf. Exod. xxxiii. *4> r5 (Where it is rendered *presence')y. 2 Sam. xvii. ri (see R.V. margin), Isa.lxiii. 9, Pss. xxi. 9 (msifgin)'-xxxiv. '16. '¦'*.' '17. The poet reckons himself with those: whw had1 Vainly hoped for help from Egypt, a hope which Jeremiah had emphatically declared to be groundless. See Jer. xxxvii. 5- rot - ¦ \i LAMENTATIONS 4. 18-20 343 In our watching we have watched for agnation that could not save. , , 'They hunt our steps, that we* cannot go in our streets : iS Our end is near, our days are fulfilled ; for our end is : come. Our pursuers were swifter than the eagles of the heaven : 19 They chased us upon the mountains, they laid wait for us in the wilderness. The breath of our nostrils,_,the anointed of , the Lord, 20 was taken in their pits ; . watching: the word occurs only here ; it is generally rendered ' watch-tower." 18. The poet vividly describes the situation during the siege. If the R.V. is right, the point is that the besiegers commanded; the; streets from the siege-towers, so that it was dangerous for the inhabitants to walk about in them. But the word rendered 'streets? means 'abroad, open place,' net necessarily within the city itself. The meaning may be, that after the retreat of the Egyptians and the renewal of -the siege,, the inhabitants were unable to walk any longer .outside the city walls. ..; 19, It is often supposed that the passage refers, like the succeeding verse, to the capture of Zedekiah (2 Kings xxv. if-***)) and his retinue, in which the poet was himself included. This is uncertain ;. the reference is probably wider, and embraces all the fugitives, who were, captured. For thefirst line cf. .Jer,,,iv» 13. The terms employed do noj correspond well to the circumstances of Zedekiah's capture. , y ¦ ¦.-,¦••.:: 20. The metaphor from hunting is continued. It isnotunusua} for hunters to dig pits into which their victims may fall, sometimes to be impaled for a lingering death, on. the stakes they have fixed in it. The Babylonians succeeded in trapping Zedekiah. ;With loyal personal affection for tjieking on whom. he had set his hopes, thepoet speaks of him as 'the breath of pur nostrils,.' as if their, con tinued existence was bound upiwith him. Thephrase is an ancient one being found, in the Tel el-Amarna letters (fifteenth century b cl) and the commentators quite a similar phrase from Seneca. The second line is thought -by some tp refer to the hopes enter tained by the people that., they might escape beyond Jordan into the mountains of Moab "and Ammon (cf. Jer. xl. 11), and ther? under Zedekiah's government maintain an independent existence. But such an independence, would have been. precarious, and the 344 LAMENTATIONS: 4.21,83' Of Whom we said, Under his shadow we shall live among the nations. at Rejoice and be glad, O daughter of Edom* that dwellest in the land of Uz: . .¦¦¦'.!' The cup shall pass through unto thee also ; thou shalt "*¦ be drunken, andshalt make thyself naked.: -.«• 22 'The punishment of thine iniquity is accomplished, O daughter of Zion ; ' ' ¦ r ! , , He ''will -'no niore carry thee away into captivity: He will visit; thine iniquity; O daughter of Edom ; He will discover thy sins. "'¦ a:tOr, Thine iniquity hath an end kingship but a. palecounterpart of the1 sovereignty he had exercised, More probably the poet is thinking of thear hope In former days that they would maintain their 'national existe'rice- in their owM lanH'.'under Zedekiah, though so mueh had been lost in the cata-' strorfhe-'of sg^'-s.c The Targum' refers the passage to' Josiatij: since'' it could hot understand terms of such appreciation applied tojZedekiah. But this is forbidden by- the context. ; " r'21;''22.'" The hatred: of the Jews for Edom, caused bf its elcuhatioit fiver the fail of Jerusaleni, finds expression In severM pas^ajges, ¦sohle among the most lurid in' Hebrew' prophecy ;j see Isa*. xxiiv,- lxiii. i-6, Ezek, xxxv, Obad. 10-15, Ps; cxxxvii. '%* In this passage the poet bids Edom make the most of its opportiinity, for soon-it will haVe-to drink of the same cup of shameful humili ation, while Judah has already received its. punishment. . For the figure of'the 'cup cf. Jen xxvi.Tisff;, arid for the close of 21 cf, Hah/iiT'rSrio*. - in the land of Uz : see note on Jer. xxv. 20, also on Jobi. t. The XXX omits 'Uz'; 'the land' might then mean Palestine, and the allusion be to the annexation of Jewish territory by Edom, to whitfh'we have a reference in Ezek. xxxv. 16-12. For this 'iii our lairid' would be-better. It is likely on. metrical grounds!that a 'word should be "struck out, all the more that either 'land' or ' tJz ' might readily have risen by dittography out of the other, ft Would perhaps be best'toread 'in Uz.' Tlie punishment ... accomplished. ' The margin should be substituted ¦; see note on 6. Judah's sin belongs to the past, it iS over and done with (cf. Isa. xl. 1) ; Edom's as yet remains un- punisfteuy but YahWeh will drag it into the light and punish it. LAMENTATIONS 5. a 345 Remember, O Lord, what is come upon us : fi Behold, and see our reproach. Our inheritance is turned unto strangers, v ' > 2 ^ "" ' " . . — : — ~T- 7* — • — ^ H — - /.1 ;n' r/A v. 1-22. The Fifth Poem. ; : !.- ,,.-,• '-,:' - This poem consists, like i,ii, and iv, oftwenty:two verses, yet it is not alphabetic in its arrangement, though Ball discovers some traces of a lost acrostic. It differs from its predecessors in that it is not written in the Qina rhythm. It is, strictly speaking, a prayer, but the greater part is occupied with a description of the miseries under which the people are suffering, some in one way and some in another. This description is an integral part of the prayer, be ing designed to appeal, tp Yahweh's compassion and secure His help. . The poem i^ apparently later than ii and iv. It is concerned not with the horrors of the siege, unless ii, 12 are to be so inter preted; but with the wretched conditions of those who are left in Palestine, a feeble remnant, deprived of their ancestral possessions, the victims of penury, forced labour, and oppression. A,consider- able period has elapsed since the destruction ojf Jerusalem.; these who were children at the time, have now grown to manhood, and' the poet speaks in .a way which implies that Yahweh's apparent indifference seems to express a settled attitude, rather than a pass ing cloud of displeasure (20). We may therefore with some con fidence place the poem fairly late in the exilic-period, Yet there is,, no- indication of any change in the political situation.. .It is therefore probable that the career of Cyrus had not yet begun, or, if' 'it had,;that the author had no knowledge of it. He wrote presumably in Judaea. . a. ¦ . .The poet appeals to Yahweh to look on the affliction of the people. They -have lost their homes, their fathers are in: exile, their mothers ' no more fortunate than widows; They are grievously oppressed and serve the foreigner for bread. Their miseries are due to the sins of their forefathers, who died with their -guilt unexpiated. Upstarts are their governors ; their bread they win at the risk of their lives ; they are fevered with famine. Wqmen are dishonoured, princes hanged up by the hand.. Young men carry the mill, boys stagger under the firewood. , All joy has ceased; their crown lies in the dust. It is the penalty of their'sin. Above all, they grieve for, the desolation of Zion.. But tbe throne of Yahweh abides for ever ; , why does He forsake and forget His people for ever? Let Him bring them hack ; if indeed He hasnot utterly rejected them. , , " vi 2-6. In these' verses the poet describes the wretched condi tion- of if hose who had been deprived of their ancestral possessions in the country districts; and had therefore to purchase what had 34$ LAMENTATIONS: S. >* Our houses unto aliens. ' We are orphan's and fatherless, - ' Our mothers are as widows; ' : We have drunken our water for money ; Our wood a is sold unto its. Our. pursuers are' upon our hecks :' - ^SJie arg, weary, ^and; have no rest i -Weihaye; given the baridHothe Egyptians, ,5 j,, .1; -.".i ' ?Heb, cometh for price. been theirown, their Water and-their lwOodj either from" the new possessors, or perhaps by paying a tax to the Babylonian governor (Cf. i. II). They were orphans in the sense thai their fathers had' been ta"keninto exile, sothat while their mothers Were not literalljs widows, they were no better -off .'than if they were actually so (' our" mothers are as widows ').' ' 3. mothers : not a figurative expression for the cities of Judah, but literally meant, like all the expressions in this- passage; CheySe's emendation ' citadels'1 {'drmendtheynu) yields a rather; better assonance, but at the expense ofthe parallelism. '" '¦"¦' B. This is a difficult verse. The first line is strangely expressed: Frequently it has been rendered ' On our necks are we pursued;5 we must' suppose the meaning to be," our pursuers are hard at our heels. But the reference td pursuit is strange. The speakers belong apparently to. those left behind in the land. "Who should pursue them ? We might think of them either as' being-chased oiif of the land, but broken wretches such as they were:could: hardly be politically dangerous. Or they might be attempting1 to escape from their eviHot, with pursuers hard after them to- bring them' back. This would agree with 6, but is otherwise'' difficult; - Had the fugitives ' been runaway slaves, hot pursuit -would have been intelligible ; but this" seems not to have been the case. The:refef-~ ence to pursuit is accordingly suspicious bbthin itself and the form in which it is expressed. The text is apparently corrupt. The word' rendered 'upon 'is* identical, apart from the pointing, With the word for 'yoke.' It is probably that originally both: words stood in the text, though we might simply alter the pointing and read 'the yoke of our neck' (so Ball), and that we should alter the verb. What is required is some verb expressive 'of the- grievous pressure of the yoke, and Ball's suggestion ' they made heavy ' approximates tp.thepr«bab)e original : 'Theypke on our neck they have ,niade heavy;' this harmonizes well with the secondlh'he. .... i 6. The reference i& not to- earlier. political alliances -made with LAMENTATIONS 5. y-9. 347 - And to the Assyrians, to be satisfied with bread. Our fathers have sinned, and ate riot; Wherefore dost thou' forget us for ever, And forsake us so longtime? • '• '->¦• Turn thetr-ias unto thee,* O i Lord, • arid' we . shall' be turned ; Renew our days as ©fold; i a But thou hast utterly rejected us, Thou art very wroth against us. • * fOr, Unless thou '.' . . and art &c. 20. Seeing then the permanence of His dominion, •why should He forget His people, when He couldwithout effort restore them ? 21. See note pn^Jer. xxxi..-i8j but here, the language seems to be meant in "a "spiritual sense. 22. The meaning is probably more correctly 'given in the margin. The poet's tone is more tentative than the R.V. text suggests ; he means God surely will hot entirely reject His pepple, and for ever maintain His alienation from them.' In the synagogues, it is true, 21 was repeated after 22, that the reading might not end on the sad note of 22. A similar' Custom prevailed, with better reason, in Isaiah,. Malachi, and Ecclesiast.es. INDEX Abaddon, 335. Abarim, 229. Abdeel, 159. Abner, 48. Abu Ghosh, 36. Abraham, 29, 135, 143. Achan, II, 100. Achbor, 37 f., 155. Acrostic, 289 f., 296. 332, 345. Adeney, 297. Admah, 247. Agag, ij. Agriculture, .144 f. Ahab, King ©f Israel, 148, 318. — Prophet, 55, 60 f. Ahikam, 27, 29, 35, .38, 155, 178 f., 182, 184, 189. Ai, 240 f. i Alexander the Great,. 220, 223, Almon-Diblathaim, 233. Amalek, 11. Amasa, 48. Amasis, 201, 208, 220 f. . Amaziah, 100. Ammon, 16, 18, 183, 185, 187, 189, 230, 239-42, 2851 3°2) 343* ' ¦ ^ Ammon, King of thechUdrenof, 42. Ammonites, 82, 187. ..." Amon, 222. .1 . Amorites, 228. Amos, 22, 73, no. :-- Anakim, 226. ¦ ¦¦ Anathoth,^?. -1 ^S> 1 *5 *<' ' Antediluvians, 328. Anthropomorphism, 28., 94. Antiochus Epiphanes, 3°7-:,i' Apis, 219.. ¦"*-¦?¦«•¦ f.'yi Apocalyp8ct.S» 20»-> 2*' •'" ' J Apries, 208. Aquila, .191, 261. Ar of Moab, 228 f., 233, 241. Arab, Arabian, 19, 242, 250 f., 263, 347 f. ." Arabah, 97, 176 f., 282. Arabia, 16, 19, 225. Arabic Version, 314. Aram, 18. Aramaic papyri, 202. Ararat, 271. Araunah, 116. Ark, 82, 314, 317. Armenia, 271. Aroer, 227, 229 f., 232 f. Arpad, 248 f.. Asa, 182, 187,. 189. . Asaheh. 169.- . to : . . ":':' Ashdod, 17 f., 225 f. v :. . i ' Ashkelon, 17, 223 f~ Ashkenaz, 271. Assyrian, Assyrians,: 79; 117, 259 f., 262, 266, 270, 347, Atbash, 20 f., 264. - Athaliah, 66. Azariah, 192, 195. : Azekah, 136, 138.-; Azriel, 159c / : Azzur, 48. Baal, Baalim, Baalism, 123 r., 145, 148. Baal pf Tyre, 14$. " - Baalis, 183, 185, Baasha, 189.' "it . - , : Babel, BabyloiJps, 6, " 12-15, 37-47, 113, et p«ssim\. :¦¦¦ Babylonia, 55, 57-9,-81,0117. '''- Babylonians, 46, 56, 61, 63, 224. i - ,i'ffj":j 352 JEREMIAH Ball, C. J., 289, 297, 309,312 f., 324, 3=9) 33i» 339 f., 345-7. 349- Ban, 11,261. Barnes, W. E., 268. 7 Baruch, 14, 33, 35 f., 39 f., et passim. Bashan, 260. Bedawin, 251, 363, 347. / Bel, 255..a75-: •-' - ¦'¦¦'¦ Belshazzar, 43. ,,. ¦'- Ben-hadad, 249 f, Benjamin, 302. > : -.¦>¦.¦ ' — Gate of, 164, .168 f.o a 'r. — Land of, 91, 115 f., 127) 133, 163 f. ¦ : ". -/. Benjamin of Tudela, 150. Bennett, 148. Beth-baal-meon, 233. , Beth-diblathaim, 233 f. . • Beth-gamul, 233 f. . Beth-meoiji.233'f; r Beth-shemesh, 198,, 200. Bethel, 91, 23if. . n . Bethlehem, 91 f., 187, 191.. Bezer, 233. , ;, Bickell, 307, 310, 314, '318, 337 f- '•¦¦'¦ Bildad, 308;' Bleeker, 10..: - Blood-licking, 143. Boaz, 115. Bochart, 263.,- .in Book ofthe Covenant, 141. Book of the Law, 37 f.., 154 f., 159, 201. Bozrah (in Edom), 243 f., 248. — (in Moab), 233 f.'i. , '.c.. ' Budde, 173, 212, 254, 271,; 278, 290 f., 296^302, 305*.; s©8f., 311, 316-8, 820, 325 £} 329, 337 U 341, 347 f. "' = Bulmerincq, 108. I ' Busaireh, 245. Buz, 16, 18. ; Cain, 342. Cairo, 201. Calf cut in twain, 140, 142 f. Canaan, 80, 119, 123, 132, 144, Xaqaapites, 11, 144. Cahkerworm, 269, 272. Caphtor, 225. Captivity, 105. Carchemish, 3, 5-7, 17, 213-5, 223. Carians, 221. Carmel, 220, 260. Casdim, Kasdim, 264^ Chaboras, 215. - Chaldeans, 6, 15, 112-4, 121-3, et passim. ?<¦. ' <-'¦ Chemosh;: 227, 230 f., 239 f. Cherethites, 225. Cheyne, 17 f., 48, 54,86, 95, 97, 102, no, 146, 228 f., 235,263) 272, 297, 361, 307, 309, '3*3) 315-7, 3=3, 329, 33'i» 333* 337, 339, 343, 34*3-8. J Christianity., 84. Chronicle"Sy 292.' Chuzistan, 252. Circesium, 215. Cities ofttjle South, 127, 133. Cleopatra's Needle, 201. • Coastland, 18, 88. Cobb, &$n~ ...¦..., Coele-Syria, 285.. '¦"¦'^ — -.- Condaaifin, 151, 154,2911 "i - Coniah,f-i6r, .--,, ,,1 -vS: Xook, S. A., 246. Cornill, 4-^6, 8 f., n i.,et passim. Court of the Guard, 112-5,1^8. 166-71, 175. .-J - Covenant, 103 f., 139-43. "'-""" Creation passages) 129. ;-,.':, Creator, 129. .: . Crete, 225. Curse, Gursingj 17, 29^ 62 f. :. Cush, 217. :1. -.,; Cushi;, 1516. .t'.-.A. ...,- > / Cushiter 156.:- .": - Cyfene, 208, 221. Cyrus, 9% 35ar 255, 345, , . . INDEX 353 Damascus, 248-50. Darius, 277. David, 61, 71, 74, 78, 82, 100, 127 f., 131, 133-5. Davidson, A. B., 48, 212, 294. Day of Yahweh, 24, 73. De Hoop Scheffer, 316.- . De Wette, 68. Dead Sea, 228 f., 2^af., 235-7* 245, 247. Decalogue, 103, 120. Dedan, Dedanites, 18,' 243 f. Deed of Sale, 112, 117-9, 121. Delaiah, 155, 159. - 1 Delitzsch, 82 f., 91. Demetrius, 223. DeuteronomicLaw, 28,-100, 143,, 34°- Deuteronomic Reformation,: 202. Deuteronomy, 89, 102 f., 140 f. Dibon, 227 f., 232 f." Diodorus Siculus, 148. , I Dies Irae, 73. Dillmann, 91. Dispersion, 88. Dragon, 273. Driver, 60, 64, 73, 75 f., 90,93, 108, 114, 118, 158, 219 f., 231,: 235, 242, 246, 278; Dschirbas, 215. Duhm, gt, 12 f., 15 fc, et passim. Dungeon, 165-70, 335- Dyserinck, 311, 316 f. Ebed-melech, 167-70, 179, 19°. Ecclesiastes, 350. Edom, 16-19, 23, 185, 242-8, 264, 302, 337, 344, 347- — King of, 42. Edomites, 251. Eglaim, 229. Eglath-Shehshiyah, 236!. Egypt, 3, 7, i6,3,6t.fet passim. Eichhorn, 254. Ekron, 17 f., 225 f. Elam, 20, 252 f., 260 Elasah, 56. Elders of the land, 32. Elealeh, 236 f. Eleutheropolis, 33. Elihu, 19. Eliphaz, 19, 244. Elishama, 155, 158. El- Jib, 48, 189. El-nathan, 36 f., 155, 159. Encyclopaedia Biblica, 17, 19, 37, &c. Entry, The third^i7i f. Ephraim, 69-71, 81, 85-8, 91-4, 97 1, 260.1. Ephraimites, 84 f., 98. Ephrath, 91 f. Erbt, 16, 69, 80, 149, 159, i8b,» 193, 197, 207, 209; 212, 219, 223, 250 f. Esau, 244. Eschatology, 5, 19, 22, 73, 79. Ethiopia,; 40, ;i56i< 217. Ethiopian, 156, 170. Euphrates, 213-6, 218, 268, 274, 278-80. Eusebius, 233; Evil-Merodach, 43, 285. Ewald, 59, 96* 129, 323, 325. Exile, Duration of, 12-15, 21, Exiles, 49 f., 54-68,354. Exodus, The, 80 f., 104 f., 119- 21, 132. Extradition, 36f., 155. Ezekiel, 16, 33, 88, 99, 101, I23f., 136, 250-6,. 271, 295f., 313, 3*9- Findlay, 119. Firstborn, 87 f. Folly, Fool, 64, 87. , Frazer, 314. Gad, 240. Gall, Von, 200. Gareb, no. Gargamish, 215. Gath, 18, 225 f. Gaza, 17, 223-6. a a 354 JEREMIAH Gedaliah, the Governor, 38, 14.7. 155, 167, I7*V 178-91, x97, 205, 284. Gedaliah ben Pashhur, i66.f. : . : Gemariah ben Hilkiah, 57, ', Gemariah ben Shaphan/: 56 f., 147, 155 f-, 159- ¦ " ¦""' Gerlach, 297. .:':, . , •> Geruth Chimham,, igoj ¦ Gibeon,; Gibeoriitesy 48, ' 100, i8at Gibeon, PoqI of, 182, 190. Giesebrecht, 6, 16; -et passim. ; Gilead, 218, 239, 260.-. Gillies, 108^ 112, 198,' 209, 223.' Goah, no. f -dq3 Go'.'el,, 115..- --¦ ¦: .to'i'i Gomer, 19 f. o r;>: ^,->x Gomorrah, 247. : .gvo Gospel, 106. ri' ,r;oa5I Gospels/, -73i ¦'• r .¦'¦¦"'' "?'-fl Graeco-Persiaie War, 70 ' roa. Graetz, 24, 272. .'<&<..,¦ ',.-. Graf, 13, '15, 39V 56, 66\n68,- 70, 87, 108, in, I28f.,"i37, 148, 152, 198, 226, 240, ¦254, 262,265,272,278. " '«- -!.', " '. Gray,G,:B., 37, 243. Greenup, 297. -, ".v .: Habakkuk, 213. 1 Habazziniah, 147. Ham, 217.- - ' ¦ in.f. . Hamath,»i7fi, 248 f., 282, 284. Hammurabi, Code of, 63. " z Hamutal, 281. Hanan, 147. Hanamel, 11 1-3, 115-8, 167. Hananel, no. Hananiah, 38, 40-2, 48-54, 67. Hannibal, 116. Hastings, 242f., 245, 291, 297." Haupt, P., 172, 262. Hazor, 250-2. r Hegesippus, 150. Heliopolis, 200 f. . . . Herod, 91. , " Herodotus, 208, 221, 223,' 274, 277. Hesban, 228. Heshbon, 228 f., 233, 236 f., 239-41. "¦,,. .:*"" Hezekiah, 33 f.,. 156, rcTi, '-¦ Hildebrand, 231. /-ol ->. Hilkiah, 57, 155. '¦< ¦¦>'; Hinnom, Valley of, no, 124. Hitzig, 13, 15, 43, 53,, 56, ,68, 87, 108, 128, 1.37, 156, 190,. 220,-223, 226; 255, 275/,, Holon,233f. 2: . .¦ "• Horonaim, 229,:23£»f. -'.r Horton, R. F.j 243. . ."¦", Hosannah, 86. HoseaiC33y 80 f*. , nfiiono'i ,!u3- Hoshaiah, 192, 195. .o(,g Huldafy .'3 73-fi: i i n : a no J : Hyrcanus, John, 227. .< '' -* t ..". ¦. - ¦ -v~n.y; >j- A. Igdaliah,i47. ¦":.. .... 1. i Individual Responsibilitjrj-ioi. Ionians, 221. -, -¦¦¦¦\ Irijah, 163-5. -- .unr. :; Isaac, 135. . ...!-•-: ¦-,:.:¦! Isaiah, 32-4, 48, 34o,;35o.j::.;i'' Ishmael, 182-4,; 186-91. -r. . <"' Ishraaeiites, 18, 347. Ishtar, 205.: , .. ;. Israel, Israelites, 10 f,, 68-75, 80-2, 86-9, et passimc Jaazaniah, 147. , -'->¦• , - • Jackal, 274, 338. Jacob, 70 f., 74 f.,. 78, 85,1 89, 135- . ..- ,-" Jacob's pillar, 231^ . .. r-i'S Jahzah, 233 f. r James, 150. -'¦' , ;; Jazer, 235 f. -.rr Jebel Atarus, 228. -. ,,;,,-, Jeconiah, 41, 45, 47, 49, 53,f(., Jehoahaz, 7, 205, 217. Jehoiachin, 46, 50, 114, 136, 159, 205, 252, 254,: 285. Jehoiada, 65 c INDEX 355 Jehoiakim, 3-7, i4) 35-g, 42, et passim. Jehu, 144, 148. Jehucal, jucal, 161 f., 167. Jehudi, 151, i56, 158. Jephthah, 82. Jerahmeel, 159. Jeremiah of Libnah, 281. Jeremiah the Rechabite,'i47. Jeremias, 117. Jericho, Plains of, 176. Jeroboam, 36. Jesus, 106. Jezaniah, 184, 192. Joash, 66. Johanan, 183-91, 193, 195 f. Johns, 117, 119. Jonadab, 144-50. Jonah, 10, 213, 275. Jonathan ben Kareah, 184. Jonathan the Maccabee, 18. Jonathan the scribe, 165, 171. Jordan, 228, 264. "¦ — Valley, 229. l Joseph, 91, 302. • Josephus, 191, 285.- Joshua, 48, 100. Josiah, 5-8, 37, ,39, 107, 145, 153 f-, I59, 2°5, 217,292, 344- Jotham, 30. Judah, 3-5, 10^12, et passim. — Prophets ofj 39. Judas Maccabaeus, 18, 260; Judeans, 70. Kadytis, 223. .. . '. - >'\ Kareah, 184-6, i89f., 192 f-, 190. Kautzsch, 95, 176. • : : '-.••¦¦J'' Kedar, 250 f. Kenites, 144. Kent, 75, 77, 84> Io3>>JI2- Kerak, 235, ... m..i Kerioth, 233 f., 238. , - Keturah, 19. ¦-.. Khirbet'Erma, 36. :-_,. _ Kidron, 37. II1-' ; Kir of Moab, 235. Kir-heres, 228, 235. Kiriathaim, 227 f., 234. ' Kiriath-jearim, 36. Kittel, 95. Klostermann, ill. Koberle, 108, 167, 209, 212, 227,248, 250, 252. Koliah, 62 f. -•! ' Konig, 108. Krochmal, 226, 320. Kuenen, 43, 212, 226, 254. Kureyat, 228. Lachish, 136, 138. La garde, 219. > Lake Urumia, 271. Lake Van, 271. Lamp, 1 1 f. - r : Law, io2f., 138, 146, 318 f.' -'" — of Holiness, 63, "'' Leb-kamai, 264 f. ¦-. Levites, 127 f., 133ft - Lofthouse, 270. : Lohr, 291, 294; 296 f.y 301 f.j 307 f., 312, 314-6, 322', 325J7, 329 f., 334,1337, 341 f. » Lucian, 42, 60 f. Ludim, 217. >' Luhith, 229. Libyans, 217. Lydians, 217. ' ' Maaseiah, 63, 65, 147, 153, 162, 192. " '¦''!-¦ - Macalister, R. A. S.:, 245.J1 Maccabees, 146. Madmen, 228. . ' . Magdolos, 223. Mahseiah, 118, 279. Ma'in, 233. Malachi, 243, 350. Malcam, 240 f, , Malchiah, 167 f. Malchijah, 146. Marduk, 255. Mareshah, 33. , Martel, Charles, 260. 35*5 JEREMIAH Marti, 102, 242. Mat Marratirh, 260. Medeba, 233. ,, Medes, 256, 268. Mediterranean, 88. Megiddo, 223. Meinhold, 320. Melkart, 148. Memphis, 220. Mephaath, 233 f. Merathaim', 260. .- 1 .m Merodach, 255. Mesha, 232. - Messiah, 73, 96, 133. Micah, Micaiah, 32-5, 340. Micaiah, 42, 44, 49. Micaiah ben Gemariah, 151, 155 1 Michaelis, 330. Michal, 82. Midian, 36. Midrash, 197. Migdol, 203, 218. Milcom, 230, 240. Mill, 11 f., 345,349. Mingled People, 16 f., 19. Minni, 271. ' . . •¦:-. Miriam, 82. Misgab, 228. Misrites, 347. , .-.:i:w Mizpah, 48, 180, 182-90. = Moab, 16, 185, 226-39, 240, 242, 254* 285^343. : 'i •¦• ' — King of, 42. Moabite Stone,' 228, 230, 232ft, 235- Molech, 113, 124. Morashtite, 34. Moresheth-gath, 33. Moses, 144, 150. Moulton, W. J., 102. Mourning customs, 173 f. Movers, 43, 68, 101, 108, 128, 226, 255. Nabataeans, 148, 247, 250. Nabopolassar, 7; 215. Nagelsbach, 294,, 297. Naharina, 18. Nahum, 213. Nazirites, 339. Nebo, 227?., 233 f. — Mount, 228. Nebuchadnezzar, 3, 6 ft, 10, 13, 39-41, 43 f., et passim.- Nebushazban, 177 f, Nebuzaradan, 91, 176, 178, i8of., 185, 189, 197, 282-5. Neby Samwil, 48. . Negeb, 97. ..',•,. , Nehelamite, 64 f., 67 f. : ' ! Nehemiah, 18, 133. Nehushta, 37, 56. • Nergal-sharezerj 177 f. Neriah, n8f., I53f.j 156, 160, 279. Nethaniah, 156,1184, 188-91. Neumann, (297/ ¦'¦:: New Covenant, 69 f., 72, 99, 101-9. New Gate, 30. ,. Nile, 215 f., 268, 274. Nimrim, 228,, — Waters of, 236 ft Nitocris; 274. No-amon, 222:, 268. Nob, 100. Noldeket 9,1,337. Nomad life, 144-6, 148: Noph, 263, 218, 220. North Arabian Theory, 97, 347. Northern Kingdom, 47, 81, 187. Nowack, 242. - - Obadiah, 242-6. Obed-Edom, 246. Ochus, 252. Oettli, 297, 347. Old Covenant, 104, 106 ft Olivet, no. Oracles on the Nations, 3-6, 212 ft Orelli, 13, 365 75, 91, 108, 212, 254. INDEX 357 Orontes, 249. Osiris, 219. Ostrich, 338. Palestine, 40, 54, 61, 69, 72, 81, , 86, 89, 93, 95, 99, 126, 181, 224. Pashhur, 66 ft Pashhur ben Malchiah, 167. Pathros, 202 ft, 205. Peiser, 20. Pekod, 260. Penknife, 159. Pentateuch, 78, 82. Persians, 252, 256. Petra, 245, 247. Petrie, 199. Pharaoh, 3, 6, 21, 36, 40, 82. Pharaoh Hophra, 162, 202, 208, 214, 219, 223. Pharaoh Necho, 213, 215, 223. Pharaoh's house, 197-9. Philistia, 16, 223. Philistines, 17 ft, 223-6. Phoenicia, 18, 223 ft, 226. Phoenicians, 224. Pierotti, 150. Pompey, 307. Praetorius, 327. Priestly Legislation, 78, 133. Prison, 113, 163 6. Psammetichus, 40. Ptolemy, 223. Pukudu, 260. Punt, 217. Put, 217. Qaryet el-'Enab, 36.: Qina rhythm, 104, 290 ft, 345- Qinoth, 289. Quartermaster, 278, 280. Queen-Mother, see Nehushta. Queen of Heaven* 201-3, 205-7. Rabbah, 240 ft Rabbath-Ammon, 236. Rabbath-Moab, 229. Rab-mag, I77f- Rab-saris, 177 ft Rachel, 71, 91 ft, 302. Rachel's grave, 91 ft Raisin cakes, 235. Ramah, 90-2, 180 ft Ramsay, 83. Rechab, 145ft, 14&-50. Rechabim, 150. Rechabites, 144-50, 153. Red Sea, 248, 264. Rehoboam, 80. Reuben, 87. Reuss, 209, Revelation of John, 12. Riblah, 65, 176,^78, 282, 284, 3°5- Right of Redemption, inf., "5- Robinson, 36. Roll of Jeremiah's prophecies, . 14, 36 ftr56, 72, 147, 151-60, 209-1 1. Rome, Romans, 12, 19. Rost, 20. Rothstein, 14, 16, 34, et passim. Sabbath, 146. Sagur, 215. Salem, 188. Samaria, 71, 83, 86, 188, 318. 324- Samaritans, 98. Samgar-Nebo, 177. Samuel, J50. Sar, 236. Sarfa, 229. Sarsechim, 177. Satan, 332. Saul, n, 66, 100. Schleusner, 327. Schmidt, N., 40, 54, 70, 97, 102, 112, 127, 145, 166, 176, 179, 182, 191, 220, 223, 227, 251ft Schwally, 4ft, 10, , 14, 209, 212 ft, 218, 245. Scott, 148. 358 JEREMIAH Scythians, 24, 256; ¦. Second Isaiah, 22, 63, 70, 75, 85, 87-9,' 101, 106,. 108. Sela, 247. ¦ ': Selbie, J. A., 242, 2971 , Seneca, 343. Sennacherib? 33, 138, 340. Septuagint, 3 ft,. 7-710, et passim. Seraiah bensAzriel, 159. Seraiah ben Neriah, 153,378-81. Seraiah ben Tanhumethi 184.: ' Seraiah the priest, 65. Servant of Yahweh^ 75, 326, 331. '-F I ¦ -.¦:; | ..." Shallum, father of Hanamel, 115. — father of Maaseiah, 147, Shaphan, 37 ft, .56 ft, 155 ft Shechem, 188. Shelemiah ben Abdeel,' 159,- — ben Cushi, 156; ->' -•[. "¦'¦- -^- fatjier, of Jucal,'ci67.'"' . Shemaiah,fatherof Delaiah,i55. — fatherof Uriah, 36.' • vi — the Nehelamite, 55J-64-8. Sheol, 313,328. ,rJ: : Shephatiah, 166. Sheshach, 20, 274.. ; 1 Shiloh, 26, 28, 30ft, 82; 84, 188. Sibmah, 236, ,1, Sidon,. 224 ft Sievers, 291. Sihon, 228, 233, 239. i.-r. Sinai, Sinaitic Covenant, 103 ft Skinner, 177, 281, 283 ft "' ¦ Slaves, Hebrew, 138-44. -.• ' Smend, 68 ft, 101 f. v.": .' ! Smith, G. A., 229,^242, 246, 313- ' . ' • Smith, Payne,>>297.:rt .r i- ,1 -: — W. R., 48. ... :.-)'>:, , Sodom, 60, 247, 337-9. ' ' ; Solidarity, Doctrine of, 100ft Solomon, 36,' 48i'78, 131 j 283. , Stade, 45, 68, ioi, n'i,< 119, ] '"-'152^212." ' . •!",--,•- Stephen, 29, 31. Streane, 297, 315. Stretton, 236. Susiana, 252. Swinburne, 301. Symmachus, 195. Sympathetic magic, 279. Syria, Syriahs/42, 144, 146, 149, 249. Syriac Version, 27, 34, 58, 65ft, 165V 115-8, i47,,_iQ4,r 199, 206, 228, 265, 273 ft). 314, 320, 330. '. , ,.Jr', i ..V H Taboo, 83. ,! 'r Tabor, 215, 220.- Tabret, 82. '•' Tahpanhes, 191, 196-9, 202 ft, 21.8. Taraar,;63.;" Tammiiz, '275. ' Targum, 25, 66,.r95, 897,' 302, 33°,- 344- ! "' "'''",. Teima, 18; Teispes, 252. ¦¦¦ Tel el-Amarna letters, 343I Tel el-Hesy, 138. Tel-Erfad, 249. Tema, 16, 18. Teman, 243 ft, 24'8. Temple, 33 ft, ,41, 47, et passim. — officers, 65 ft — vessels, 41, 45-9; Ten tribes, 259. ' " Thebes, 222. Thenius, 297. Thomson, 189. Tigris, 252. Tobiah, 347. Torah,'3i9. , .. ., Trumbull, 147. Tudela, 150^ . Tyre, 18, 224ft Tyre, King of, 4,2, Uriah, 27, 35-7,^55, 157, 34L Uz, 16-19, 344. ' - INDEX 359 Vulgate, 34, 5i, s8, 66, 194 ft, 198 ft, 228, 265, 289. Wady Kerak, 229. Wady Numeirah, 237. Wailing women, 173 ft Wellhausen, 212, 242 ft Western Asia, 3. [Whitehouse, 235. Wiedemann, 208. Winckler, 250 ft Wine cup, Vision of, 4-7, 15- 22, 266. Wolff, 150 Xerxes, 70. Year of Jubilee, 140. Zeboim, 247. Zechariah, 13. Zedekiah, 3, 5 ft, 13 ft, et passim. Zephaniah the priest, 55, 64-7, 147, 162, 284. — the" prophet, 73, 156. Zidon, King of, 42. Zimri, 16, 19. Zion, 34, 71, 76-8, et passim. Zoar, 229, 236 ft OXFORD : HORACE HART PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY