thereby given up, in a defenceless state, to the foe, so that they could treat them like dirt and abuse them. *HD (from nnp, Ezek. xxvi. 4), found only here as a noun, signifies " sweepings; " and DiSD is a noun, " disesteem, aversion." The words of ver. 45 indeed, imply the dispersion of Israel among the nations, but are not to be limited to the maltreatment of the Jews in exile; moreover, they rather apply to the conduct of their foes when Judah was conquered and Jerusalem destroyed. Such treatment, especially the rejection, is further depicted in ver. 46. The verse is almost a verbatim repetition of ii. 16, and is quite in the style of Jeremiah as regards the reproduction of particular thoughts; while Thenius, from the repetition, is inclined to infer that chaps, ii. and iii. had different authors: cf. Gerlach on the other side. The very next verse might have been sufficient to keep Thenius from such a precipitate conclusion, inasmuch as it contains expressions and figures that are still more clearly peculiar to Jeremiah. On nriDJ ins, cf. Jer. xlviii. 43; "^n is also one of the favourite expressions of the prophet, nx^n is certainly air. \ey., but reminds one of W *pa Num. xxiv. 17, for which in Jer. xlviii. 45 there stands jiKB> \33. It comes from HWP, to make a noise, roar, fall into ruins with a loud noise, i.e. be laid waste (cf. Isa. vi. 11); and, as Raschi has already observed, it has the same meaning as n-NyJ, "devastation," Isa. xxiv. 12. It is incorrect to derive the word from the Hiphil of WW (J. D. Michaelis and Ewald), according to which it ought to mean " disappointment," for the n does not form an essential portion of the word, but is the article, as "Q$ro shows. Still more erroneous are the renderings eirapcns (LXX., from R&J) and vaticinatio (Jerome, who has confounded nKtfn with R&D).
Over this terrible calamity, rivers of tears must be shed, until the Lord looks down from heaven on it, vers. 48-51. The prophet once more utters this complaint in the first person, because he who has risked his life in his endeavour to keep the people in the service of God must feel the deepest sympathy for them in their misfortunes. " Rivers of water" is stronger than " water," i. 16, and "tears like a stream," ii. 18; but the mode of expression is in the main like that in those passages, and used again in Ps. cxix. 136, but in a different connection.
The second member of the verse is the same as in ii.
and Kosenmiiller, following the Chaldee), hut, " so that there is no intermission or drying up." As to nfapfl, which means the same as flttfij see on ii. 18. " Until the Lord look down from heaven and examine," in order to put an end to the distress, or to take compassion on His people. On TP"'!, cf. Ps. xiv. 2, cii. 20. — Ver. 51, taken literally, runs thus: " Mine eye does evil to my soul" (7$V with ^ signifies to inflict an injury on one, cause suffering, as in i. 2, 22, ij. 20), i.e. it causes pain to the soul, as the Chaldee has already paraphrased it. The expression does not merely signify "causes me grief" (Thenius, Gerlach); but the eye, weakened through incessant weeping, causes pain to the soul, inasmuch as the pain in the eye increases the pain in the soul, i.e. heightens the pain of the soul through the supcraddition of physical pain (Niigelsbach). Ewald has quite missed the meaning of the verse in his translation, " Tears assail my soul," and in his explanatory remark that TOiy is used in a bad sense, like the Latin afficit; for, if?7W had this meaning, WV could not stand for tears, because it is not the tears, but only the eyes weakened by weeping, that affect the soul with pain. Ewald is also wrong in seeking, with Grotius, to understand "the daughters of my city" as signifying the country towns, and to explain the phrase by referring to ii. 22. For, apart from the consideration that the appeal to ii. 22 rests on a false conception of that passage, the meaning attributed to the present verse is shown to be untenable by the very fact that the expression " daughters of my city" is never used for the daughter-towns of Jerusalem; and such a designation, however possible it might be in itself, would yet be quite incomprehensible in this present connection, where there is no other subject of lamentation, either befdre or after, than Jerusalem in its ruined condition, and the remnant of its inhabitants (Gerlach). " The daughters of my city " are the daughters of Jerusalem, the female portion of the inhabitants of the city before and after its destruction. Nor will 'what is added, " because of the daughters of my city," seem strange, if we consider that, even in i. 4, 18 and ii. 20, 21, the fate and the wretched condition of the virgins of the city are mentioned as peculiarly deplorable, and that, in fact, the defenceless virgins were most to be pitied when the city fell; cf. v. 11. But the objection of Bottcher and Thenius, that *yv rri: 2 fet? forms a harsh construction, whether we view it grammatically or in the light of the circumstances, inasmuch as IP, after "mine eye pains me," is unsuitable, whether taken in a causal or a comparative meaning:— this objection, certainly, has some truth in its favour, and tells against any attempt to take the words as indicating a comparison. But there is nothing against the causal meaning, if " mine eye causes pain to my soul " merely sonifies " my eye pains me," because the pain of the eye is the result of the profuse weeping. If those words, however, possess the meaning we have given above (the pain in the eyes increases the smart in the soul), then there is nothing strange at all in the thought, tt The evil condition of the daughters of my city is so deplorable, that mine eyes fail through weeping, and the sorrow of my soul is thereby intensified." Gerlach has already refuted, though more fully than was necessary, the conjecture of Bottcher, that Hfo3 should be changed into rtf33 (from all the weeping of my city). — Vers. 52-54. His pain and sorrow over the sad condition of the people recall to his memory the persecutions and sufferings which the godly have endured. The figure, "They who without cause are mine enemies have hunted me like a bird," is an imitation of Ps. xi. 1. B3n ^N reminds one of Dsn ss^
Ps. xxxv. 19 and Ixix. 5. But the prophet prefers '3\s to *&U8P, lest any one should restrict the words to persecutions which arose out of personal hatred. — Ver. 53. inpv is here used transitively in Kal, as the Piel is elsewhere, Ps. cxix. 139, and the Pilpel, Ps. lxxxviii. 17. "^33 ^P-f, " they were destroying (cutting off) my life down into the pit," is a pregnant construction, and must be understood de conatu: u they sought to destroy my life when they hurled me down into the pit, and cast stones on me," i.e. not " they covered the pit with a stone " (Pareau, De Wette, Neumann). The verb ITT construed with 3 does not take this meaning, for ttV merely signifies to cast,
•* in the [)itin which I was" hut k' upon (or against) me." The sing. I-* is to be understood in accordance with the expression jzx DXJ, to cast stones = stone (1 Kings xii. 18; Lev. xx. 2, '11). for vi"}, see on ri|3 in ver. 33. u Waters flowed over my head" is a figurative expression, denoting such misery and distress as endanger life; cf. Ps. lxix. 2, 3, 15 f., CXX1V. 4 f., xlii. 8. " I said (thought), I am cut off (from God's eyes or hand)," l's. xxxi. 23, lxxxviii. 6, is a reminiscence from these Psalms, and does not essentially differ from "cut off out of the land of the living," Isa. liii. 8. For, that we must thereby think of death, or sinking down into Sheol, is shown by nrnnn "n^p, ver. 55. The complaint in these verses (52-54) is regarded by some expositors as a description of the personal sufferings of Jeremiah; and the casting into the pit is referred to the incident mentioned in Jer. xxxviii. 6 ff. Such is the view, for instance, taken by Vaihinger and Nagelsbacli, who point for proof to these considerations especially: (1) That the Chaldeans certainly could not, without good cause (ver. 53), be understood as the " enemies;" (2) that Jeremiah could not represent the people, speaking as if they were righteous and innocent; and (3) that the writer already speaks of his deliverance from their power, and contents himself with merely calling down on them the vengeance of God (vers. 55-6G). But not one of these reasons is decisive. For, in the first place, the contents of ver. 52 do not harmonize with the known hostility which Jeremiah had to endure from his personal enemies. That is to say, there is nothing mentioned or known of his enemies having stoned him, or having covered him over with a stone, after they had cast him into the miry pit (Jer. xxxviii. 6 ff.). The figurative character of the whole account thus shows itself in the very fact that the separate portions of it are taken from reminiscences of passages in the Psalms, whose figurative character is universally acknowledged. Moreover, in the expression D2n ^x, even when we understand thereby the Chaldeans, it is not at all implied that he who complains of these enemies considers himself righteous and innocent, but simply that he has not given them any good ground for their hostile conduct towards him. And the assertion that the writer is already speaking of his deliverance from their power, rests on the erroneous notion that, in vers. 55-66, he is treating of past events; whereas, the interchange of the perfects with imperatives of itself shows that the deliverance of which he there speaks is not an accomplished or bygone fact but rather the object of that assured faith which contemplates the non-existent as existent. Lastly, the contrast between personal suffering and the suffering of the people, on which the whole reasoning rests, is quite beside the mark. Moreover, if we take the lamentations to be merely symbolical, then the sufferings and persecutions of which the prophet here complains are not those of the people generally, but of the godly Israelites, on whom they were inflicted when the kingdom was destroyed, not merely by the Chaldeans, but also by their godless fellow-countrymen. Hence we cannot, of course, say that Jeremiah here speaks from personal experience; however, he complains not merely of the persecutions that befell him personally, but also of the sufferings that had come on him and all godly ones. The same remark applies to the conclusion of this lamentation, — the prayer, vers. 55-66, in which he entreats the Lord for deliverance, and in the spirit of faith views this deliverance as already accomplished.
Vers. 55-66. Prayer for deliverance, and confident trust in its realization. Ver. 55. u Out of the lowest pit I call, O Lord, on Thy name;" cf. Ps. lxxxviii. 7, 14, cxxx. 1. The perfect Ti&0|5 is not a preterite,1 but expresses what has already happened, and still happens. This is evident from the fact that the corresponding perfect, £$?$ ver. 5Q^ is continued by the optative ^j?rr^>\ nrnnn in is taken from Ps. lxxxviii. 7: " pit of the lower regions of the earth/' — the PJ1J rtVIIWj Ps. lxiii.
1 The perfects are so viewed by Nu^elsbach, who also thinks that the speaker, in vers. 55-58, thanks the Lord for deliverance from the pit, and in ver. 55 reminds the Lord of the prayer lie has addressed to Him out of the pit. But could he possibly think that the Lord had forgotten this? What, we should like to know, would be the use of this reminder, even if 'lJ1 Dbyri";X, ver. 56, could be taken as the words of address to the Lord? For we can discover no thanksgiving in vers. 55-58. This whole mode of viewing the passage breaks down before ver. 59: "Thou hast seen mine oppression; judge me! " For, if the perfects in vers. 55-58 are preterites,
10, r k. \\\ii. 18, 24, ic. Sheolj essentially the Bame with ztl' ~*-\ ver. 6, which is thereby connected with Ps. Ixxxviii. 7, — the dark regions of the depth, whose open mouth is the grave for every one (see Delitzsch on Psalm-, /.<■.), hence the symbol o( mortal danger. — Ver. 56. "Thou bast heard my voice" expresses the full assurance of faith from which the request comes: "Cover not Thine ear from mv sighing." nnn "breathing out again;" in Ezek. viii, 11, mitigation of oppression, yet not hero rtrpiratio, relaxatio (C. B. Michaelis, Rosenmiiller, etc.), — since the asyndetic WVrr does not accord with such an interpretation,— hut a relieving of oneself by means of deeplv-draw n sighs, as in Job xxxii. 20; hence " sighing," as Luther has already rendered it, following the Vulgate: ne avertas aurem tuum a singultu meo (Thenius, Gerlach, etc.). — In vers. 57 and 58, the writer still more fully expresses his confidence that the Lord will accept him. " Thou art near on the day when I call on Thee" is a sentence found in Ps. cxlv. 18, and uttered as the experience of all believers. " Thou sayest, Fear not," i.e. Thou assurest me of Thine assistance; cf. Jew i. 8, 17, etc. u Thou dost conduct the causes (Ger. Strcitsachen) of my soul" (^"i ^M)j i.e. not merely a my lawsuits," but causas quce vitam et salutem meam eoncernunt (C. B. Michaelis). This is shown by the parallel member, "Thou redeemest my life," sc. from the destruction which threatens it; cf. 53 f., Ps. ciii. 4. With this is connected the request in ver. 59, a Thou dost certainly see my oppression " (p^V from TO, to bend, oppress), the oppression which I suffer; u judge my cause," i.e. help me in my cause, cf. Jer. v. 28. The suppliant bases this request, vers. 60-G2, on the recollection that God, as the Omniscient One, knows the plans and intentions of his opponents. a Thou seest all their plans for revenge." no|5i is not here the outcome of revenge, then also nrVNI, ver. 59, can only be a preterite; and the prophet can only be speaking of injustice that has been done him previously: hence he cannot add thereto the request, "Judge me," inasmuch as the Lord (according to Niigelsbach) has already judged him by delivering him from the pit. Moreover, it is quite arbitrary to understand the perfects in vers. 59 and 62 as referring to what has been done and is still heing done to the speaker by his enemies, if it be agreed that the perfects in vers. 55-58 refer only to past events.
but the thought of revenge cherished in the heart; it does not, however, mean desire of revenge, or revengeful disposition, but simply the thinking and meditating on revenge, which certainly has the spirit of revenge for its basis, but is not identical with this. Their thoughts are the plans cf vengeance.?, dat. incomm.j " to my hurt;" the reading ty of some codices is simply a correction after ver. 61. This revenge they express in reproaches and invectives. *nafe>, " lips," for utterances of the lips; and «? as in Ps. xviii." 40, 49 = ^? D*»iJ, Ps. iii. 2, etc. »Dj5 rnsb> corresponds to DTianri, and DJfan to cnhrnp, ver. 61; and the whole of ver. 62 still depends on "Thou nearest," without any need for supplying PH, as Rosenmullcr does. Thenius and Niigelsbach would combine ver. 62 with 63, and make the former dependent on ntt^n; but this is unsuitable, nor do they consider that utterances or words are not seen (ffaij), but heard (ypf). With this proposed combination there falls to the ground the further remark of Thenius, that " by lips, devising, sitting, rising up, are meant the conversation and consultation of the enemies one with another." Sitting and rising up have nothing in common with speaking about any subject, but merely form a circumlocution for action generally: cf. Ps. cxxxix. 2; Deut. vi. 7, xi. 19: Isa. xxxvii. 28. The form nra:o for W33 occurs nowhere else: Ewald considers it a form that has been lengthened for the purpose of designating a mocking song — u Sing-song." This supposition has at least more to recommend it than the ingenious but worthless idea of Bottcher, that nr:ro is contracted from fiy^TlD, " what a stringed instrument am I to them;" but it also is improbable. WU& is the subject of the nj^, as words formed with D often express merely the subject of the idea contained in a noun or verb; cf. Ewald, § 160, h) 3. After this statement of the hostile treatment which the speaker has to suffer, there follows the renewed and further extended request that God may reward the foes according to their deeds. ITUTi, « Thou shalt return," is a confident expression of the request that God would do this; hence the optative |Jnri follows in ver. 65. In ver. 64 is condensed the substance of what is contained in Ps. xxviii. 4. J? ns;o? covering (veil) of the heart, — an expression analogous to the KaXvfx/xa hrl ttjv Kap&lav, 2 Cor. iii. 15, — is not obduration, or hardening, but blinding of the heart, which casta into destruction; but it can scarcely signify "madness" (Delitzsch, BibL Psychology y Clark's trans- lation), since the Arabic iJksye, insanity furor, lias probably received this meaning from ^, genius, dcemon; cf. Gcscnius,
Tlics. s.w., and Rosenmiiller, ad h. I. "Thy curse to them!" is not to be viewed as dependent on "give," but to be explained in accordance with Ps. iii. 9, "Thy blessing [be] upon Thy people!" — thus, u May Thy curse be their portion!" The curse of God is followed by destruction. "Destroy them from under Jah veh's heaven!" i.e. not merely id non sint amplius sub ccelis (C. B. Michaelis), because mrv is not considered in this latter rendering. The heaven of Jahveh is the whole world, over which Jahveh's authority extends; the meaning therefore is, " Exterminate them wholly from the sphere of Thy dominion in the world," or, Thy kingdom.
1 How the gold becomes dim, — the fine gold changcth, — Sacred stones are scattered about at the top of every street!
3 Even the she-wolves reach the breast, they suckle their young ones; [But] the daughter of my people [hath become] cruel, like the ostriches
5 Those who ate dainties [before] are desolate in the streets; Those who were carried on scarlet embrace dunghills.
of Sodom, "Which was overthrown as in a moment, though no hands were laid on her.
7 Her princes were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk,
streets; Their skin adhereth closely to their bones, — it hath become dry, like wood.
9 Better are those slain with the sword than those slain with hunger; For these pine away, pierced through from [want of] the fruits of the own children; They became food to them in the destruction of the daughter of my people.
believe That an adversary and an enemy would enter in at the gates of Jerusalem?
13 Because of the sins of her prophets, the iniquities of her priests, Who shed blood of righteous ones in her midst,
14 They wander [like] blind men in the streets; they are defiled with bloody So that [people] could not touch their clothes.
touch not!" When they fled, they also wandered; [People] say among the nations, " They must no longer sojourn [here]."
17 Still do our eyes pine away, [looking] for our help, [which is] vanity: In our watching, we watched for a nation [that] will not help.
18 They hunt our steps, so that we cannot go in our stn i Our end is near, our days are full, — yea, our end is come.
19 Our persecutors were swifter than the eagles of heaven;
20 The breath of our nostrils, the anointed of Jahveh, was caught in their
pits, [Of] whom we thought, " In His shadow we shall live among the nations."
21 Be glad and rejoice, 0 daughter of Edom, dwelling in the land of Uz: To thee also shall the cup pass; thou shalt be drunk, and make thyself
22 Thy guilt is at an end, 0 daughter of Zion; He will no more carry thee
captive: He visiteth thine iniquity, 0 daughter of Edom; He discovereth thy sins.
The lamentation over the terrible calamity that has befallen Jerusalem is distinguished in this poem from the lamentations in chap. i. and ii., not merely by the fact that in it the fate ol the several classes of the population is contemplated, but chiefly by the circumstance that the calamity is set forth as a well-merited punishment by God for the grievous sins of the inhabitants of Jerusalem. This consideration forms the chief feature in the whole poem, from the beginning to the end of which there predominates the hope that Zion will not perish, but that the appointed punishment will terminate, and then fall on their now triumphant enemies. In this fundamental idea of the poem, compared with the first two, there is plainly an advance towards the due recognition of the suffering as a punishment; from this point it is possible to advance, not merely to the hope regarding the future, with which the poem concludes, but also the prayer for deliverance in chap. v. The contents of the poem are the following: The princes and inhabitants of Zion are sunk into a terrible state of misery, because their guilt was greater than the sin of Sodom (vers. 1-11). Jerusalem has been delivered into the hands of her enemies on account of her prophets and priests, who have shed the blood of righteous ones (vers. 12— 1G), and because the people have placed their trust on the vain help of man (vers. 17-20). For this they must atone; for the present, however, the enemy may triumph; the guilt of the daughter of Zion will come to an end, and then the judgment will befall her enemies (vers. 21,22).
Vers. 1-11. The misery that has come on the inhabitants of Jerusalem is a punishment for their deep guilt. The description given of this misery is divided into two strophes: for, first (vers. 1-G), the sad lot of the several classes of the population is set forth j then (vers. 7-11) a conclusion is drawn therefrom regarding the greatness of their sin. — Vers. 1-6. The first strophe. Ver. 1. The lamentation begins with a figurative account of the destruction of all that is precious and glorious in Israel: this is next established by the bringing forth of instances.— Vers. 1, 2 contain, not a complaint regarding the desolation of the sanctuary and of Zion, as Maurer, Kalkschmidt, and Thenius, with the LXX., assume, but, as is unmistakeably declared in ver. 2, a lamentation over the fearful change that has taken place in the fate of the citizens of Zion. What is stated in ver. 1 regarding the gold and the precious stones must be understood figuratively; and in the case of the "gold that has become dim," we can as little think of the blackening of the gilding in the temple fabric when it was burnt, as°think of bricks (Thenius) when " the holy stones*' are spoken of. The W *» (inhabitants of Zion), ver. 2, are likened to gold and sacred ston-s; here Thenius would arbitrarily change *J3 into *|3 (houses, palaces). This change not merely has no critical support, but is objectionable on the simple ground that there is not a single word to be found elsewhere, through all the chapter, concerning the destruction of the temple and the palaces; it is merely the fate of the men, not of the buildings, that is bewailed. " How is gold bedimmed!" DP* is the Hophal of E£y, to be dark, Ezek. xxviii. 3, and to darken, Ezek. xxxi. 8. The second clause, " how is fine gold changed!" expresses the same thing. KJtP = nj£ according to the Chaldaizing usage, means to change (oneself), Mai. iii. G. The growing dim and the changing refer to the colour, the loss of brilliancy; for gold does not alter in substance. C. B. Michaelis and Rosenmuller are too specific when they explain that the gold represents popidus Judaicus (or the potior populi Hebron pan)} qui (quce) quondam auri instar in sanctuario Dei fuhjcbat, and when they see in Vhp VpS an allusion to the stones in the breastplate of the high priest. Gold is generally an emblem of very worthy persons, and " holy stones" are precious stones, intended for a sacred purpose. Both expressions collectively form a figurative description of the people of Israel, as called to be a holy nation and a kingdom of priests. Analogous is the designation of the children of Israel as TO VJ3K, Zech. ix. 1G (Gerlach). SJ3flK>n, to be poured out (at all the corners of the streets), is a figurative expression, signifying disgraceful treatment, as in ii. 11. In ver. 2 follows the application of the figure to the sons (i.e. the citizens) of Zion, not merely the chief nobles of Judah (Ewald), or the princes, nor children in the narrowest sense of the word (Gerlach); for in what follows mention is made not only of children (vers. 3, 4), but also of those who are grown up (ver. 5), and princes are not mentioned till ver. 7. As being members of the chosen people, all the inhabitants of Jerusalem have been held « dear," and " weighed out with gold," i.e. esteemed as of equal value with gold (cf. Job xxviii. 16, 19);
garded as earthenware pots, i.e, treat if they were utterly worthless, as »• a work ot the hands of the potter/1 whereas the hands of ( rod, [sa. lxiv. 7. ubo cf, Job wwii. 16, L9 [to weigh; Pual, be weighed out, as an equivalent]. This disregard or rejection of the cil \ Zion is evidenced in ver^ 3 and onwards by many examples, beginning with children, ascending to adults | and ending with princes. T Btarvation to death of the children (vers, ii, 1) is mentioned first j and the frightful misery that has befallen Jerusalem is vividly set forth, by a comparison of the way in which wild animals act towards their young with the behaviour of the mothers of Jerusalem towards their children. Even jackals (T-^ for c*:n? see on Jer. ix. 10) give their breasts to their young ones tuck. "■'-■■ WJJ, extrahuui mammam = they present their breast. A Junius has remarked, the expression is taken a mulieribus lactantibuSj qua laxata vests mammam lactanti prasbent; hence also we are not, for the sake of this expression, to understand psn as meaning cetus (Bo chart and Nagelsbach), regarding which animal Bochart remarks (// •'■ / -:. iii. p. 777, ed. Rosenmuller), ceti papilla* nun essi tTTLcpaveU, quippe in mammis eptce tanquam in vaginis conduntur. Rosenmiiller has already rejected this meaning as minus apta for the present passage. From the combination of jackals and ostriches as inhabiting desert places (Isa. xiii. 21 f.; Job xxx. 29), wo have no hesitation in fixing on " jackals" as the meaning here. "The daughter of my people" {ci. ii. 11) here means the inhabitants of Zion or Jerusalem. 1T3K7, " has become cruel." The Ketldb
C\:j; »3 instead of E':r2 ( Q ri) may possibly have arisen from a purely accidental separation of the letters of the word in a ms.. a reading which was afterwards painfully retained by the scribes. But in many codices noted b\r Kennicott and De Rossi, as well as in several old editions, the word is found correctlv joined, without any marginal note. D*})P means ostriches, usually ""W ^3 (" daughter of crying," or according to Gesenius, in his Thesaurus, and Ewald, following the Syriac, " the daughter of gluttony"), the female ostrich. The comparison with these animals is to be understood in accordance with Job xxxix. 16: " she (the female ostrich) treats her young ones after having done no more than slightly Bg up the soil —and partly also, when the nest is full, on the sui: I the ground; she then leaves them to be hatch,- I. in OOUIM of li see on Job xxxix. 14-lb\— A>
= D1Q as in Mic. iii. 3, to break down into pi read but adults, that are spoken of. DTJ either in the Lamentations i •'
antithesis to Bat:i. II I
the red are to be understood as mixed, and shading into one another, as our popular poetry speaks of cheeks which < like milk and purple shine' " (Delitzsch on Job xxviii. 18, Clark's translation). "Sapphire their form" (rn?a, prop, cut, taille, of the shape of the body). The point of the comparison is not the colour, but the luminosity, of this precious stone. Once on a time the princes glittered so; but (ver. 8) now their form is dark as blackness, i.e. every trace of beauty and splendour has vanished. Through hunger and want their appearance is so disfigured, that they are no longer recognised in the streets (ntan, in contrast with " at home," in their own neighbourhood). " The skin sticks to the bones," so emaciated are they; cf. Ps. cii. 4, Job xix. 20. "1% air. \ey., to adhere firmly. The skin has become dry (BQJ) like wood.— Ver. 9. This pining away with hunger is much more horrible than a speedy death by the sword. Dn^, "for they" = 7?// ip$i; W, prop. flow away, i.e. pine away as those pierced through (E^if?, cf. Jer. xxxvii. 10, li. 4). '» ntoUflD does not mean " of the fruits," but IP is a brief expression for " because there are no fruits," i.e. from want of the produce of the field; cf. 00 CTO -jz, " my flesh wastes away from oil," i.e. because there is a want of oil, Ps. cix. 24. There was thus no need for the conjecture rri3N?rift, " from burning glow," from drought, which has been proposed by Ewald in order to obtain the following sense, after supplying 3: " as if melting away through the drought of the field, emaciated by the glowing heat of the sun." The free rendering of the Vulgate, conmmpti a sterilita ives no support to the conjecture. — Ver. 10. Still more horrible was the misery of the women. In order to keep themselves from dying of hunger, mothers boiled their children for food to themselves; cf. ii. 20. By the predicate " compassionate/1 applied to hands, the contrast between this conduct and the nature, or the innate love, of mothers to their children, is made particularly prominent, nnn is a noun = nvu, l\s. lxix. 22. On " the destruction of the daughter of my people," cf. ii. 11.— Ver. 11. This fearful state of matters shows that the Lord has fully poured out His wrath upon Jerusalem and His people. % to complete, bring to an end. The kindling of the fire in Zion, which consumed the foundations, is not to be limited to the burning of Jerusalem, bat is ■ symbol of the complete traction of Zi d by the wrath of God; cf. Deut. xwii. 32. \ 20. 'This judgment of wrath is a consequence of the sins of the prophets and priests (vers. L2 16), as well as of their vain trust on the help of man (vers. 17 20). Ver. L2f. The capture of Jerusalem by enemies (an event which none in all the world thought possible) lias been brought on through the: the prophets and priests. The words, u the kings of the earth... did not believe that an enemy would come in at the • s of Jerusalem," are well explained by C. B. Michaelis, thus: rtitudinem urbis, quce munitissirna erat, turn defen- Tehovam, qui ab hostibus, ad internecionem casts,))i aliquoties, mirifi.2 Reg. xix. 34. The
Words certainly form a somewhat overdrawn expression of deep subjective conviction; but they cannot properly be called a hyperbole, because the remark of Nagelsbacb, that Jerusalem had been taken more than once before Nebuchadnezzar (1 Kings xiv. 26: 2 Kings xiv. 13 f.; 2 Chron. xxxiii. 11; 2 Kings xxiii. 33 ft*.), seems incorrect. For the occasions upon which Jerusalem was taken by Shishak and by Joash king of Israel (1 Kings xiv. and 2 Kings xiv.) belong to those earlier times when Jerusalem was far from being so strongly fortified as it afterwards became, in the times of Uzziah, Jotham, and Manasseh (2 Chron. xxvi. 9, xxvii. 3, xxxiii. 14). In 2 Chron. xxxiii. 11, on the other hand, there is nothing said of Jerusalem being taken; and the capture by Pharaoh-Necho does not call for consideration, in so far as it forms the beginning of the catastrophe, whose commencement was thought impossible. Ewald wrongly connects ver. 13 with ver. 12 into one sentence, thus: " that an enemv would enter the gates of Jerusalem because of the sins of her prophets," etc. The meaning of these verses is thereby not merely weakened, but also misrepresented; and there is ascribed to the kinirs and inhabitants of the world an opinion regarding the internal evils of Jerusalem, which they neither pronounced nor could have pronounced. — Ver. 12 contains an exclamation over the incredible event that has happened, and ver. 13 assigns the cause of it: the mediating and combining thought, u this incredible thing has happened," suggests itself. It has taken place on account of the sins of her prophets and priests, who have shed the 1 capital charge, because be had announced th in and the temple would suffer the fate of Shiloh; from tl the priests and prophets in Jer, vi.. 1".
combines vers. 13 and 14, thai ft the would be the subject t
Ewald, and Then:
neither introduce an antithesis, nor mean " yet... yet." (2.) In view of the shedding of blood, wrangling is a matter of too little importance to deserve mention. Luther's rendering, " because they feared and fled from them," is a mere conjecture, and finds no support whatever from the words employed. Hence Gesenius, in his Thesaurus, has rightly explained «B, after W}, Jer. xlviii. 9, " to fly, flee, or take to flight." Following him, the moderns translate: " because they had fled, they also staggered about." It is better to render ^ by quum, " when they fled," sc. to other nations, not specially to the Chaldeans. W3 is selected with reference to what precedes, but in the general meaning of roaming restlessly about. The idea is as follows: Not merely were they shunned at home, like lepers, by their fellow-countrymen, but also, when they wished to find a place; of refuse beyond their native land, they were compelled to wander about without finding rest; for they said among the nations, "They shall no longer sojourn among us." Thus the curse came on them, Deut. xxviii. Go f. — Ver. 16. This was the iudement of God. His face (i.e. in this connection, His angry look; cf. Lev. xvii. 10, Ps. xxi. 10) has scattered them (p?n as in Gen. xlix. 7). No longer does He (Jahveh) look on them, sc. graciously. The face of the priests is not regarded. D*3D Kfett, TrpoacoTrov XafiSdveiv, to regard the person of any one, i.e. to have respect to his position, dignity, and age: the expression is here synonymous with |3n, to show favour. The subject is indefinite, but the enemy is meant. Thus the threatening in Deut. xxviii. 50 is fulfilled on them. D*3gt does not mean " elders," but " old men," for the words can be referred only to the priests and prophets formerly spoken of.
Vers. 17-20. In spite of these facts, which show that God has poured out His fury on us, and that our prophets and priests have been smitten by God for their sins, we still wait, vainly relying on the help of man. In this way, ver. 17 is attached to what precedes, — not merely to ver. 16, but also the series of thoughts developed in vers. 12-16, viz. that in the capture of Jerusalem (which nobody thought possible) there is plainly made known the judgment of God upon the sins of His people and their leaders. It is with special emphasis that n:Hiy stands at the beginning of the verse: " still do our eyes continue to i substitutes ^"|iy, is abnormal, since niy does not take plural forms of the sullix in any other instance, and ^P— does not occur elsewhere ai a noun-suffix. The form is evidently copied from ~:,srn, and must he third fern, pi., as distinguished from the singular-suffix njjty, 1 Kings i. 22. The Qeri unto, which is preferred by Michaelis, Pareau, Rosen miiller, and Thenius, has for its basis the idea "we still were;" this is shown by the translation tV/ oi'Tcov yjjbLcov of the IjX X., and cum adhuc subsisteremus of Jerome. But this view of the word, like most of the Qert8f is a useless attempt at explanation; for ^s"iiy alone cannot have the meaning attributed to it, and the supplements proposed, in statu priori, or " in the city," are but arbitrary insertions into the text. The combination njv3f) ^W, which is a rare one, evidently means, "our eyes are still pining (consuming) away," so that the imperfect is used with the meaning of the participle; cf. Ewald, § 30G, c, Rem. 2. The combination of n?3 with •S is pregnant: " they consume away (while looking out) for our help;" cf. Dent, xxviii. 28, Ps. Ixix. 4. /3fl is not an exclamation, "in vain!" (Thenius), but stands in apposition to "our help;" thus, "for our help, a help of vanity," i.e. for a vain help; cf. Ewald, § 287, c. The vain help is more distinctly specified in the second member of the verse, as a looking out for a nation that will not help. HJBy does not mean " the watch-tower " (Chald., Syr., etc.), — because " on the watchtower" would require to be expressed by?V; cf. Isa. xxi. 8, 2 Chron. xx. 24, — but " watching." By the " nation that does not help," expositors, following Jer. xxxvii. 7, think that Egypt is intended. But the words must by no means be referred to the event there described, inasmuch as we should then be obliged to take the verbs as preterites, — a course which would not accord with the interchange of the imperfect (JW3in) with the perfect (l^2y). A strange confusion would also arise, such as is made out by Vaihinger: for we would find the prophet placing his readers, in ver. 14, in the time of the siege of Jerusalem; then, in ver. 15, into the conquered city; and in vers. 17 and 18, back once more into the beleaguered city, which we again, in ver. 19, see conquered (Gerlach). According to vers. 18-20, Judah is completely in the power of the Chaldeans; hence the subject treated of in ver. 17 is the looking out for the assistance of some nation, after the enemy had already taken Jerusalem and laid it in ashes. What the prophet denounces, then, is that help is still looked for from a nation which nevertheless will not help. In this, perhaps, he may have had Egypt before his mind; for, that the Jews, even after the destruction of Jerusalem^ still looked for deliverance or help from Egypt, may be inferred partly from the fact that those who were left in the country fled thither for refuge, and partly from Ezek. xxix. 16. Only, the words are not to be restricted merely to this. In order to show convincingly how vain it is to expect help from man, Jeremiah, in vers. 18-20, reminds his readers of the events immediately preceding the capture of the city, which have proved that nobody — not even the king himself — could avoid falling into the hands of the Chaldeans. Gerlach has correctly given the sense of these verses thus: " They still cling to their hopes, and are nevertheless completely in the power of the enemy, from whom they cannot escape. All their movements are closely watched; it is impossible for any one to deceive himself any longer: it is all over with the nation, now that all attempts at flight have failed (ver. 19), and that the king, ' the life's-breath' of the nation, has fallen into the hands of the enemy." Gerlach and Nagelsbach have already very properly set aside the strange and fanciful idea of Ewald, that in ver. 18 it is still Egypt that is regarded, and that the subject treated of is, — how Egypt, merely through fear of the Chaldeans, had at that time publicly forbidden the fugitives to go to Palestine for purposes of trade and traffic. These same writers have also refuted the arbitrary interpretation put upon 'W ^ny>* TO by Thenius and Vaihinger, who imagine there is a reference to towers used in a siege, from which the besiegers could not merely perceive all that was going on within the city, but also shoot at persons who showed themselves in exposed places. In reply to this, Nagelsbach appropriately remarks that we must not judge of the siege-material of the ancients by the range of cannon. Moreover, W does not mean to spy out, but to search out, pursue; and the figure is taken f rpm the chase. The idea is simply this: The enemy (the Chaldeans) watch us in our every step, so that we can no longer move freely about. Our end is near, yea, it is already come; cf. Ezek. vii. 2-6. A proof of this is given in the capture of King Zedekiah, after ho had lied in the night, vor. 19 f. For an elucidation of the matters contained in these verses, cf.,Ier. xxxix. 4 f., lii. 7 f. The comparison of the enemy to eagles is taken from Deut. xxviii. 49, whence Jeremiah has already derived chap. iv. 13 and xlviii. 40. pN, prop, to burn, metapk. to pursue hotly, is here (poet.) construed with ace, but elsewhere with ^nx; cf. ( > n. xxxi. 3C), 1 Sam. xvii. 53. " On the hills and in the wilderness," i.e. on every side, even in inaccessible places. "In the wilderness" alludes to the capture of Zedekiah; cf. Jer. xxxix. 5. '•The breath of our nostrils" is an expression founded on Gen. ii. 7, and signifying "our life's breath." Such is the design ation given to the king, — not Zedekiah in special, whose capture is here spoken of, because he ex initio magnam de se spem concitaverat, fore ut post tristia Jojakimi et Jeclionuv fata pacatior res publica esset (Aben Ezra, Michaelis, Vaihinger), but the theocratic king, as the anointed of the Lord, and as the one who was the bearer of God's promise, 2 Sam. vii. In elucidation of the figurative expression, Pareau has appropriately reminded us of Seneca's words (Clement, i. 4): ille (prineeps) est spiritus vitalis, quem hcec tot millia (civium) trahunt. " What the breath is, in relation to the life and stability of the body, such is the king in relation to the life and stability of the nation" (Gerlach). " Of whom we said (thought), Under his shadow (i.e. protection and covering) we shall live among the nations." It is not implied in these words, as Nagelsbach thinks, that " they hoped to fall in with a friendly heathen nation, and there, clustering around their king, as their protector and the pledge of a better future, spend their days in freedom, if no more," but merely that, under the protection of their king, they hoped to live even among the heathen, i.e. to be able to continue their existence, and to prosper as a nation. For, so long as there remained to them the king whom God had given, together with the promises attached to the kingdom, they might cherish the hope that the Lord wrould still fulfil to them these promises also. But this hope seemed to be destroyed when the king was taken prisoner, deprived of sight, and carried away to Babylon into captivity. The words "taken in their pits" are figurative, and derived from the capture of wild animals. JVTO as in Ps. cvii. 20. On the figure of the shadow, cf. Judg. ix. 15, Ezek. xxxi. 17.
Vers. 21, 22. However, it is not yet all over with Israel. Let the enemy triumph; the guilt of the daughter of Zion will come to an end, and then the guilt of the daughter of Edom will be punished. With this u Messianic hope," as Ewald rightly characterizes the contents of these verses, the lamentation resolves itself into joyous faith and hope regarding the future of Israel. There is no external sign to mark the transition from the depths of lamentation over the hopeless condition of Judah, to new and hopeful confidence, just as in the Psalms there is frequently a sudden change from the deepest lamentation to joyful confidence of final victory. But these transitions have their origin in the firm conviction that Israel has most assuredly been chosen as the nation with whom the Lord has made His covenant, which He cannot break. This truth has already been clearly and distinctly expressed in the threatening* and promises of the law, Lev. xxvi. and Dent, xxviii., and is reiterated by all the prophets. The Lord will assuredly visit His ever-rebellious people with the heaviest punishments, until they come to acknowledge their sin and repent of their apostasy; but He will afterwards again take pity on the penitent remnant, gather them from among the heathen, and fulfil all His promises to them. The words u exult and rejoice" are ironical, and signify: " Rejoice as much as you please; you will not, for all that, escape the punishment for your sins." u The daughter of Edom," i.e. the people of Edom, is named as the representative of the enemies of God's people, on account of their implacable hatred against Israel; see on Jer. xlix. 7. From the designation, M dwelling in the land of Uz," it does not follow that the Edomites had at that time spread themselves widely over their original territory; for the land of Uz, according to Jer. xxv. 20, lay on the confines of Idumea. As to the form *Kiy\\ see on Jer. x. 17. ^J? C3, "towards thee also (sc. as now to Judah) shall the cup pass." On this figure, cf. Jer. xxv. 15.,TUT1\1, to make oneself naked, or to become naked in consequence of drunkenness (Gen. ix. 22), is a figurative expression indicative of the disgrace that will befall Edom; cf. i. 8, Nah. iii. 5. sptt Dn, " Thy guilt is ended." The perfect is prophetic. The guilt is ended when it is atoned for; the punishment for it lias reached its end, or grace begins. That this will take place in the Messianic times (as was pointed oat long ago in the Chaldee paraphrase, ct liberaberis per manum Me<si,r), is not indeed implied in the word en, but it is;i necessary product of the Messianic hope of Israel; cf. for instance, Jer. 1. '20. To this it cannot be objected (with Gerlaeh), that it is inadmissible to transfer into the Messianic time also the punishment of Edom threatened in the second member: for, according to the prophetic mode of viewing things, the judgment on the heathen wurld falls, as a matter of course, in the Messianic age; and to refer the words to the chastisement of the Edomites by Nebuchadnezzar is against the context of both verses. u To reveal (discover) sins " means to punish them; for God uncovers the sins in order to punish them, quemadmochim Deus peccata tcgere dicrfur, cum eorum pee nam rcmittit (Rosenmuller); cf. Ps. xxxii. 1, 5, lxxxv. 3? etc.
CHAP. V.— A rRAYER TO THE LORD BY THE CHURCII, LAN- GUISHING IN MISERY, FOR TIIE RESTORATION OF HER FORMER STATE OF GRACE.
2 Our inheritance is turned to strangers, our houses to foreigners.
3 We are orphans, without a father; our mothers are as widows.
This poem begins (ver. 1) with the request addressed to the Lord, that He would be pleased to think of the disgrace that has befallen Judah, and concludes (vera. L9-22) with the request that the Lord may not forsake His people for ever, bur. once more receive them into favour. The main portion of this petition is formed by the description of the disgrace and misery under which the suppliants groan, together with the acknowledgment (vers. 7 and 16) that they are compelled to bear the sins of their fathers and their own Bins. By this confession, the description given of their misery is divided into two strophes (vers. 2-7 and 8-10), which are followed by the request for deliverance (vers. 19-22), introduced by vers. 17 and 18. The author of this prayer speaks throughout in the name of the people, or, to speak more correctly, in the name of the congregation, laying their distress and their supplication before the Lord. The view of Thenius, — that this poem originated among a small company of Jews who had been dispersed, and who, in the midst of constant persecution, sought a place of refuge from the oppression of the Chaldeans, — has been forced upon the text through the arbitrary interpretation of detached figurative expressions.
Vers. 1-7. Supplication and statement regarding the distress. The request made in ver. 1 refers to the oppression depicted in what follows. The words, " Remember, O Lord, what hath happened (i.e. befallen) us," are more fully explained in the second member, " Look, and behold our disgrace." It is quite arbitrary in Thenius to refer the first member to the past, the second to the present, described in what follows, vers. 12-16.
The Qeri Wlfl is an unnecessary alteration, after i. 11, iii. 63. — With ver. 2 begins the description of the disgrace that has befallen them. This consists, first of all, in the fact that their inheritance has become the possession of strangers. Rosenniiiller lightly explains rfflU to mean, terra qua- tuo nobis dono quondam est concessa. "Hr1"!} is used of the transference of the property to others, as in Isa. lx. 5. Many expositors would refer tt'fi3 to the houses in Jerusalem which the Chaldeans had not destroyed, on the ground that it is stated, in 2 Kings xxv. 1) and Jer. Iii. 13, that the Chaldeans destroyed none but large houses. There is no foundation, however, for this restriction; moreover, it is opposed by the parallel tiJWW. Just as by n?m we are to understand, not merely the possession of Jerusalem, but of the whole country, so also ^"Tin are the dwelling-houses of the country in towns and villages; in this case, the question whether any houses still remained standing in Jerusalem does not demand consideration at all. Niigelsbach is wrong in his remark that WW and DTO respectively mean immoveable and portable property, for houses are certainly notmoveable property. — Ver. 3 is very variously interpreted by modern expositors. Ewald and Vaihinger understand a father" as meaning the king, while Thenius refers it specially to Zedekiah; the u mothers," according to Ewald and Vaihinger, are the cities of Judah, while Thenius thinks they are the women of Zedekiah's harem. But to call the women of the royal harem " mothers " of the nation, would be as unexampled as the attribution of the title to the cities of Judah. The second clause, u our mothers are like widows," contains a simile: they are not really widows, but like widows, because they have lost the protection which the mother of a family has in her husband. In like manner, the first clause also is to be understood as a comparison. " We are fatherless orphans," i.e. we are like such, as the Chaldee has paraphrased it. Accordingly, C. B. Michaelis, Pareau, Rosenmiiller, Kalkschmidt, and Gerlach have rightly explained the words as referring to the custom of the Hebrews: homines omni modo derelictos omnibusque prcesidiis destitutes, pupillos et viduas dicere; cf. Ps. xciv. 6, Isa. i. 17, Jas. i. 27. — Ver. 4. And not merely are the inhabitants of Judah without land and property, and deprived of all protection, like orphans and widows; they are also living in penury and want, and (ver. 5) under severe oppression and persecution. Water and wood are mentioned in ver. 4 as the greatest necessities of life, without which it is impossible to exist. Both of these they must buy for themselves, because the country, with its wraters and forests, is in the possession of the enemy. The emphasis lies on " our water... our wood." What they formerly had, as their own property, for nothing, they must now purchase. We must reject the historical interpretations of the words, and their application to the distress of the besieged (Michaelis); or to the exiles who complained of the dearness of water and wood in Egypt (Ewald); or to those who fled before the Chaldeans, and lived in waste places (Thenius); or to the multitudes of those taken prisoner after the capture of Jerusalem, who were so closely watched that they could not go where they liked to get water and wood, but were obliged to go to their keepers for permission, and pay dearly for their services (Niigclsbach). The purchase of water and wood can scarcely be taken literally, but must be understood as signifying that the people had to pay heavy duties for the use of the water and the wood which the country afforded. — Ver. 5. "On our necks we are persecuted," i.e. our persecutors are at our necks, — are always close behind us, to drive or hunt us on. It is inadmissible to supply any specific mention of the yoke (imposito collo gravi servitutis jugo, Ilaschi, Kosenmiiller, Vaihinger, etc.); and we must utterly reject the proposal to connect " our neck" with ver. 4b (LXX., Syriac, J. D. Michaelis), inasmuch as the symmetry of the verses is thereby destroyed, nor is any suitable meaning obtained. "We are jaded: no rest is granted us." rWl is Ilophal of!??•?, to give rest to. The Qeri fc6) instead of tih is quite as unnecessary as in the case of "N, ver. 3, and crx and WTOK in ver. 7. The meaning of the verse is not, " we are driven over neck and head," according to which the subject treated of would be the merciless treatment of the prisoners, through their being driven on (Nagelsbach); still less is it meant to be stated that the company to which the writer of the poem belonged was always tracked out, and hunted about in the waste places where they wished to hide themselves (Thenius). Neither of these interpretations suits the preceding and succeeding context. Nor does the mention of being "persecuted on the neck" necessarily involve a pursuit of fugitives: it merely indicates incessant oppression on the side of the enemy, partly through continually being goaded on to hard labour, partly through annoyances of different kinds, by which the victors made their supremacy and their pride felt by the vanquished nation. In f\T) there is contained neither the notion of tracking fugitives nor that of driving on prisoners. — Ver. (). The meaning of T fnj is more exactly defined by the superadded Drp i'^V?, which belongs to both members of the verse. "In order to satisfy ourselves with bread (so as to prolong our lives), we give the hand to Egypt, to Assyria." DJHVO and "^*J;N are local accusatives. To give the hand is a sign of submission or subjection; see on Jer. 1. 15. Pareau has correctly given the meaning thus: si victum nobis comqxxrave velimus, vel Judcea nobis relinquenda est atquc JEgyptii sunt agnoscendi domini, vel si Jtic manemuSj Clialdceis victoribus nos subjiciamus necesse est; quocunque nos vertamus, nihil supcrest nisi t)istissi7na servitus. Tins' complaint shows, moreover, that it is those in Judea who are speaking. *3rj}j u we give the hand," shows that the assumption of Thenius, — that the writer here brings to remembrance the fate of two other companies of his fellow-countrymen who were not carried away into exile, — is an arbitrary insertion. Asshur, as the name of the great Asiatic empire, stands for Babylon, as in Ezra vi. 22, cf. Jer. ii. 18. — Ver. 7. " We suffer more than we are guilty of; we are compelled to bear the iniquities of our fathers," i.e. to atone for their guilt. There is a great truth contained in the words, " Our fathers have sinned; they are no more; we bear their iniquities (or guilt)." For the fall of the kingdom had not been brought about by the guilt of that generation merely, and of none before; it was due also to the sins of their fathers before them, in previous generations. The same truth is likewise expressed in Jer. xvi. 11, xxxii. 18; and in 2 Kings xxiii. 26 it is stated that God did not cease from His great wrath because of the sins of Manasseh. But this truth would be perverted into error, if we were to understand the words as intimating that the speakers had considered themselves innocent. This false view, however, they themselves opposed with the confession in ver. 16, " for we have sinned; " thereby they point out their own sins as the cause of their misfortune. If we compare this confession with the verse now before us, this can only mean the following: " The misfortune we suffer has not been incurred by ourselves alone, but we are compelled to atone for the sins of our fathers also." In the same way, too, Jeremiah (chap. xvi. 11) threatens the infliction of a penal judgment, not merely " because your fathers have forsaken me (the Lord)," but he also adds, " and ye do still worse than your fathers." God does not punish the sins of the fathers in innocent children, but in children who continue the sins of the fathers; cf. Isa. lxv. 7, and the explanation given of Jer. xxxi. 29 and Ezek. xviii. 2 ff. The design with which the suffering for the sins of the fathers is brought forward so prominently, and with such feeling, is merely to excite the divine compassion for those who are thus chastised.
Vers. 8-16. Further description of the miserable condition under which the congregation languishes. Ver. 8. " Servants rule over us," etc. EH3V are not the Chaldean soldiers, who are in 2 Kings xxiv. 10 designated the servants of Nebuchadnezzar (Pareau, Rosenmuller, Maurer); still less the Chaldeans, in so far as they, till shortly before, had been the subjects of the Assyrians (Kalkschmidt); nor the Chaldean satraps, as servants of the king of Babylon (Thenius, Ewald); nor even "slaves who had been employed as overseers and taskmasters of the captives while on the march " (Nagelsbach); but the Chaldeans. These are called servants, partly because of the despotic rule under which they were placed, partly in the sense already indicated by C. B. Michaelis, as being those qui nobis potius, si pii fuissemus, servire debuissent, in accordance with the analogous desiffnation of Jerusalem as a princess among the countries of the world, i. 1. — Ver. 9. And in addition to this humiliation under dishonourable servitude, we can get our daily bread only at the risk of our life. Thus there is fulfilled to them the threatening in Deut. xxviii. 28, "Ye shall be servants among your enemies, in hunger and thirst, in nakedness and want of everything." UBJtaj "for the price of our soul," i.e. with our life at stake, we bring in our bread. The danger is more exactly described by what is added: " before the sword of the wilderness." By this expression are meant the predatory Bedouins of the desert, who, falling upon those that were bringing in the bread, plundered, and probably even killed them. The bringing of the bread is not, however, to be referred (with Kosenmiiller, Maurer, and Kalkschmidt) to the attempts made to procure bread from the neighbouring countries; still less is it to be referred (with Thenius, Ewald, and Kiigelsbach) to the need for u wringing the bread from the desert and its plunderers; " but it refers to the ingathering of the scanty harvest in the country devastated by war and by the visitations of predatory Bedouins: N'3n is the word constantly employed in this connection; cf. 2 Sam. ix. 10, Hag. i. G. — Ver. 10. The bread which we are thus obliged to struggle for, at the risk of our life, is not even sufficient to allay hunger, which consumes our bodies. 1D33 does not mean to be blackened (Chaldee, Kimchi, C. B. Michaelis, Maurer), but in Gen. xliii. 30, 1 Kings iii. 2(5, and PIos. xi. 8, to be stirred up (of the bowels, compassion), hence to kindle, glow. This last meaning is required by the comparison with TOT, oven, furnace. This comparison does not mean cutis nostra tanquam fornace adusta est (Gesenius in Tkes., Kalkschmidt), still less " black as an oven" (Dietrich in Ges. Lex.), because *W3fl does not mean the oven viewed in respect of its blackness, but (from to) in respect of the fire burning in it. The meaning is, " our skin glows like a baker's oven " (Vaihinger, Thenius, Nagelsbach, Gerlach), — a strong expression for the fever-heat produced by hunger. As to rri£i^>T, glowing heat, see on Ps. xi. 6. — Ver. 11 ff. With this must further be considered the maltreatment which persons of every station, sex, and age have to endure. Ver. 11. Women and virgins are dishonoured in Jerusalem, and in the other cities of the land. Ver. 12. Princes are suspended by the hand of the enemy (Ewald, contrary to the use of language, renders u along with " them). To hang those who had been put to death was something superadded to the simple punishment by death (Deut. xxi. 22 f.), and so far was a shameful kind of execution. " The old men are not honoured," i.e. dishonoured; cf. iv. 16, Lev. xix. 32. The words are not to be restricted to the events mentioned in Jer. xxxix. 6, but also apply to the present con- dition of those who are complaining. — Ver. 13. Youths and boys are forced to engage in heavy servile work, tttfcj |inp does not mean " they take them for the mill," ad molendum sumpserunt (Ewald, Kosenmiiller). Apart from the consideration that there is no ground for it in the language employed, such a view of the words does not accord with the parallelism. NK>J, construed with a simple infinitive or accusative (without?), does not mean " to take for something." pna is a substantive, a the mill." " To bear (carry) the mill " signifies to work at and with the mill. We must think of the hand-mill, which was found in every household, and which could thus be carried from one place to another. Grinding was the work of slaves; see on Judg. xvi. 21. The carrying of the mill (not merely of the upper millstone) is mentioned as the heaviest portion of the work in grinding. "Boys stagger (fall down) on the wood laid on them to be carried," i.e. under the burden of it.?":3 with 3 means to stumble on something; here 3 denotes the cause of the stumbling; cf. Jer. vi. 21, Lev. xxvL 37 f. It is arbitrary to understand yv as meaning the wooden handle of the mill (Aben Ezra, and Bochart in Hieroz. i. 157, ed. Rosenmuller); the same must also be said re^ardm"" the opinion of Thenius and Niigelsbach, who refer the words to the dragging of the hand-mills, and of the wood necessary for baking bread for the comfort of the soldiers, on the march of the captives to Babylon. — Ver. 15 f. Under the pressure of such circumstances, all public meetings and amusements have ceased. " The elders cease from the gate." The gate was the place of assembly for the people, not merely for deliberating upon public affairs (Ruth iv. 15; Josh. xx. 4), but also " for social entertainment (since there were no refreshment-rooms, coffeehouses, and public baths, such as are now to be found in the East), or even for quiet enjoyment in looking at the motley multitude of passers-by; Gen. xix. 1, 1 Sam. iv. 18, ix. 18, Job xxix. 7 " (Winer's Bibl. R. W.B. s.v. Thor). That the gate is here to be regarded as a place of entertainment and amusement, is shown by the parallel member, "young men cease from their instrumental music;" cf. i. 4. On ver. 15, cf. Jer. vii. 34, xvi. 9, and xxxi. 13; Ps. xxx. 12. Lastly, in ver. 16, the writer sums up the whole of the miserv in the complaint, "The crown of our head is fallen! woe unto us, for we have Binned," i.e. we suffer the punishment for our sins. 11 The fallen crown can only be a figurative expression for the honourable position of the people in its entirety, but which is now lost." Such is the view which Ewald rightly takes; on the other hand, the interpretation of Thenius, that "the i crown of our head' is nothing else than Z ion, together with its palaces, placed on Jerusalem, as it were on the head [of the country], and adorning it," deserves mention simply as a curious specimen of exegetical fancy. Nagelsbach has gone too far in restricting the figurative expression to the crown of Jerusalem, which consisted in her being mistress among the nations, a princess among the regions of the earth (i. 1), the perfection of beauty, and the joy of the whole earth (ii. 15); for " our crown" is not equivalent to Jerusalem, or a crown on the head of Jerusalem. Vers. 17-22. The request that the judgment of wrath may be averted, and that the former gracious condition may be restored. Vers. 17 and 18 form the transition to the request in vers. 19-22. "Because of this" and "because of these [things] " refer mainly to what precedes, yet not in such a way as that the former must be referred to the fact that sin has been committed, and the latter to the suffering. The two halves of the verse are unmistakeably parallel; the sickening of the heart is essentially similar to the dimness coming on the eyes, the former indicating the sorrow of the soul, while the latter is the expression of this sorrow in tears. " Because of this (viz. because of the misery hitherto complained of) the heart has become sick," and the grief of the heart finds vent in tears, in consequence of which the eyes have become dim; cf. ii. 11. But this sorrow culminates in the view taken of the desolation of Mount Zion, which receives consideration, not because of its splendid palaces (Thenius), but as the holy mountain on which the house of God stood, for "Zion" comprehended Moriah; see on Ps. ii. 6, ix. 12, Ixxvi. 3. The glory formerly attaching to Mount Zion (Ps. xlviii. 3, 1. 2) is departed; the mountain has been so much laid waste, that jackals roam on it. Dvl?v^ are not properly foxes, but jackals (as in Ps. lxiii. 11), which lodge among the ruins.?J?n is an intensive form, meaning to rove or roam about. — Ver. 19 ff. The glory of Zion, the earthly habitation of the Lord, is at an. end, bnt the throne of the Lord endnres eternally. Through this thought, the lamentation rises to the prayer that the Lord may not orsake His people for ever, but re-establish His kingdom on the earth. Thou 0 Jahveh, art enthroned eternally." This thought is expressed as the ground of hope, in nearly the same words as are found in Ps cii 13. Jahveh is the God of salvation. Since His throne endures eternally in heaven, He cannot let His kingdom perish on the earth. On this is founded the request, « Why wilt Thou forget us forever, forsake us for a length of days (i.e. through life, always, Ps. xxiii. 6) I" This the Lord cannot do because of His grace. From this is developed the further request (ver. 21), "Lead us back to Thyself, that we may return." We must not restrict n^;n and zntr to conversion to the Lord (Kalkschmidt, Ewald, Vaihinger, Gerlach); they signify the re-establishment of the gracious relation, which is, of course, impossible without repentance and conversion on the part of Israel. It is wrong to refer the words to the restoration of the people to their native land, or to the re-establishment of the theocracy (Dathe, Thenius), because it is not the exiles who address this petition to the Lord. The mode in which we are to understand the " bringing back to Jahveh " is shown in the second hemistich, " renew our days, as they were in former times," i.e. vouchsafe to us again the life (or state of grace) which we enjoyed in former times. In ver. 22 this request is based on an argument introduced in a negative form. EX *3, after a negative clause, signifies nisi, but (Ger. sondern). This meaning developed into that of a strong limitation (cf. Ewald, § 356), unless = provided that. Thus literally here: "unless Thou hast utterly rejected us,— art very wroth against us." This case, however, is merely stated as a possibility, the actual occurrence of which is out of the question. The idea is the same as that expressed by Jeremiah (chap. xiv. 19) in the form of a question, in order to give greater emphasis to his intercession for his nation. The Lord cannot have utterly rejected His people Israel, because He would thereby make His name to be despised in the eyes of the nations (Jer. xiv. 21). Thus terminates this lamentation, with a request for whose fulfilment faith can hope with confidence.
In many Hebrew MSS. ver. 21 is found repeated after ver. 22, to make the whole more suitable for public reading in the synagogue, that the poem may not end with the mention of the wrath of God, as is the case also at the close of Isaiah, Malachi, and Ecclesiastes: the intention is, to conclude with words of comfort. But ver. 22, rightly understood, did not require this repetition: for, as Rhabanas has already remarked in Ghisleri commentar. on ver. 22: ncrn here quasi desperando de salute jwpull sui locutus est, sed lit dolorem suum minium de contritione et objeetione diutina gentis sues manifestaret. This conclusion entirely agrees with the character of the Lamentations, in which complaint and supplication should continue to the end, — not, however, without an element of hope, although the latter may not rise to the heights of joyful victory, but, as Gerlach expresses himself, " merely glimmers from afar, like the morning star through the clouds, which does not indeed itself dispel the shadows of the night, though it announces that the rising of the sun is near, and that it shall obtain the victory."