fl&ifiMaXfHAROLDB.LEELIBRARYBRIGHAM YOUNGUNIVCRSSTYPROVO,UTAHt"IDigitizedbythe InternetArchivein 2011 withfundingfromBrighamYoungUniversityhttp://www.archive.org/details/criticalexegeticOOgrayInttmatinttal Cntual ammtntvix]}on t^tPolySaiptus of t^t #I& aatiUNDER THE EDITORSHIP OFThe Rev. CHARLESAUGUSTUSBRIGGS, D.D.ProfessorofTheologicalEncyclopediaandSymbolicsUnion TheologicalSeminary, NewYorkThe Rev. SAMUELROLLESDRIVER, D.D.Regius Professorof Hebrew, OxfordThe Rev. ALFREDPLUMMER, M.A., D.D.LateMasterofUniversity College, DurhamBRIGHAM YOUNOUNIVeflSITYPROVO, UTAHThe InternationalCritical CommentaryOn the Holy Scriptures of the Old andNew TestamentsEDITORS' PREFACETHEREare now before the public many Commentaries,written by British and American divines, of a popularor homiletical character. The Cambridge BibleforSchoolsJtheHandbooksforBible Classes andPrivate Students^TheSpeaker*s Commentary, The Popular Commentary(Schaff),The Expositor's Bibley and other similar series, have theirspecial placeandimportance. But they do not enter into thefield of Critical Biblical scholarship occupied bysuch seriesofCommentaries as the Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zumA. T.;De Wette's Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zumN. T.; Meyer's Kritisch-exegetischer Kommentar; Keil andDelitzsch's Biblischer Commentar ilber das A. T.; Lange'sTheologisch-homiletisches Bibelwerk; Nowack'sHandkommentarzumA.T.; Holtzmann'sHandkommentarzum N.T Severalofthesehavebeentranslated, edited, andinsomecasesenlargedand adapted, for the English-speaking public;others are inprocessoftranslation. But no corresponding series by BritishorAmericandivineshashitherto beenproduced. Theway hasbeen prepared by special Commentaries by Cheyne, Ellicott,Kalisch, Lightfoot, Perowne, Westcott, and others; and thetime hascome, in the judgmentof the projectorsof this enter-prise, when it is practicable to combine Britishand Americanscholars in the production of a critical, comprehensiveCommentarythatwill beabreastof modernbiblicalscholarship,andinameasurelead its van.The International CriticalCommentarvMessrs. Charles Scribner's Sons of New York, and Messrs.T. &T. Clarkof Edinburgh, propose to publish such a seriesof Commentaries on the Old and New Testaments, under theeditorship of Prof. C. A. Briggs, D.D., D.Litt., in America, andof Prof. S. R. Driver, D.D., D.Litt., for the Old Testament, andthe Rev. Alfred Plummer, D.D., for the New Testament, inGreat Britain.TheCommentarieswill beinternationalandinter-confessional,andwill befree from polemical and ecclesiastical bias. Theywill bebaseduponathorough critical study ofthe original textsofthe Bible, andupon critical methodsofinterpretation. Theyare designed chiefly for students and clergymen, and will bewrittenin acompactstyle. Each bookwill bepreceded byanIntroduction, stating the results ofcriticism upon it, anddiscuss-ingimpartially thequestions still remaining open. The detailsof criticism willappear in their properplace in thebodyoftheCommentary. Each section of the Text will be introducedwith a paraphrase, or summaryofcontents. Technical detailsof textual and philological criticism will, as a rule, be keptdistinct from matter of a more general character; and in theOld Testament the exegetical notes will bearranged, as far aspossible, soas tobeserviceable tostudentsnot acquaintedwithHebrew. The Historyof Interpretation of the Bookswill bedealt with, when necessary, in the Introductions, with criticalnoticesof themostimportantliteratureof thesubject. Historicaland Archaeological questions, as well as questions of BiblicalTheology, are included in the plan of the Commentaries, butnot Practical or Homiletical Exegesis. TheVolumeswill con-stituteauniformseries.TheInternationalCritical CommentaryARRANGEMENTOF VOLUMES AND AUTHORSTHEOLDTESTAMENTGENESIS. The Rev.JohnSkinner,D.D., Principal andProfessor olOldTestament Language and Literature, College of PresbyterianChurchof England,Cambridge,England.[NowReady.EXODUS. The Rev. A. R. S. Kennedy, D.D., Professor of Hebrew,Universityof Edinburgh.LEVITICUS.J.F.Stenning,M.A.,FellowofWadhamCollege,Oxford.MUMBERS. TheRev.G. BuchananGray,D.D.,ProfessorofHebrew,MansfieldCollege, Oxford. {_JVowReady.DEUTERONOMY. The Rev. S. R. Driver, D.D., D.Litt., Regius Pro-fessor of Hebrew, Oxford. \NowReady.JOSHUA. TheRev.GeorgeAdamSmith, D.D.,LL.D.,PrincipaloftheUniversityofAberdeen.JUDGES. TheRev.GeorgeMoore,D.D.,LL.D.,Professor of Theol-ogy,HarvardUniversity, Cambridge,Mass. [NowReady,SAMUEL. The Rev.H. P. Smith, D.D., Professor of Old TestamentLiteratureandHistoryof Religion, Meadville, Pa. [NowReady,KINGS. The Rev. Francis Brown, D.D., D.Litt., LL.D., Presidentand Professor of Hebrew and Cognate Languages, Union TheologicalSeminary,NewYorkCity.CHRONICLES. The Rev. Edward L. Curtis, D.D., Professor ofHebrew, Yale University, NewHaven, Conn.[NowReady,EZRA AND NEHEMIAH. The Rev.L.W.Batten, Ph.D., D.D., Pro-fessor of Old Testament Literature, General Theological Seminary,NewYorkCity.PSALMS. The Rev. Chas. A. Briggs, D.D., D.Litt., Graduate Fro.fessor of Theological Encyclopaedia and Symbolics, Union TheologicalSeminary, New York. [2vols. Now ReadyPROVERBS. TheRev.C.H.Toy,D.D.,LL.D.,Professorof Hebrew.HarvardUniversity, Cambridge, Mass. [Now Ready,JOB. The Rev. S. R. Driver, D.D., D.Litt. RegiusProfessorof He-brew. Oxford-The International Critical CommentaryISAIAH. Chaps.I-XXVII. TheRev. G.BuchananGray, D.D., Pro-fessor ofHebrew,MansfieldCollege, Oxford. \_N^(nu Heady.ISAIAH. Chaps.XXVIII-LXVI. The Rev.A. S. Peake, M.A., D.D.,Deanof theTheologicalFacultyoftheVictoria UniversityandProfessorofBiblicalExegesisin the UniversityofManchester,England.JEREMIAH. TheRev.A. F. Kirkpatrick,D.D.,DeanofEly, sometimeRegiusProfessorofHebrew^,Cambridge,England.EZEKIEL. TheRev.G.A.Cooke,M.A.,OrielProfessorof theInterpre-tationof Holy Scripture, UniversityofOxford,andthe Rev.Charles F.BuRNEY, D.Litt., Fellow^ and Lecturer in Hebrew^, St. John's College,Oxford.DANIEL. The Rev.John P. Peters,Ph.D., D.D., sometime ProfessorofHebrew,P.E.DivinitySchool,Philadelphia, nowRectorof St.Michael'sChurch,NewYorkCity.AMOSANDHOSEA. W.R. IIarper,Ph.D.,LL.D.,sometimePresidentof the University of Chicago, Illinois. [NowReady.MICAH.ZEPHANIAH,NAHUM, HABAKKUK, OBADIAH,ANDJOEL.Prof.JohnP.Smith,Universityof Chicago; W. Hayes Ward,D.D.,LL.D.,Editor of The Independent, NewYork; Prof. Julius A.Bewer, UnionTheologicalSeminary,NewYork, [NowReady,ZECHARIAH TOJONAH. Prof. H.G.MiTCHELL,D.D., Prof. JohnP.SmithandProf.J.A.Bewer. {InPress,ESTHER. The Rev. L. B. Paton, Ph.D., Professorof Hebrew, Hart-fordTheological Seminary.[NowReady.ECCLESIASTES. Prof. George A. Barton, Ph.D., Professorof Bibli-cal Literature, BrynMawrCollege, Pa.\_NowReady.RUTH, SONGOFSONGSANDLAMENTATIONS.Rev.CHARLEsA.Briggs, D.D., D.Litt., Graduate Professor of Theological Encyclopaediaand Symbolics, UnionTheologicalSeminary,NewYork.THENEWTESTAMENTST. MATTHEW. The Rev. WiLLOUGHBYC. Allen, M.A., Fellow andLecturerinTheologyandHebrew, ExeterCollege, Oxford. [NowReady.ST. MARK. Rev. E. P. Gould,D.D.,sometimeProfessorofNewTesta-ment Literature, P. E. Divinity School, Philadelphia. INmvReady.ST. LUKE. The Rev. Alfred Plummer, D.D., sometime Master ofUniversity College, Durham.[^^Ready.The International Critical CommentaryST.JOHN. TheVeryRev.John Henry Bernard,D.D., Deanof St.Patrick'sandLecturerin Divinity, University of Dublin.HARMONYOFTHEGOSPELS. The Rev. William Sanday, D.D.,LL.D., LadyMargaret Professor of Divinity, Oxford, ana the Rev. WlL-LOUGHBY C. Allen, M.A., FellowandLecturer in DivinityandHebrew,ExeterCollege, Oxford.ACTS. The Rev. C. H. Turner, D.D., Fellow of Magdalen College,Oxford, and the Rev. H. N. Bate, M.A., Examining Chaplain to theBishopof London.ROMANS. The Rev.William Sanday, D.D., LL.D., Lady MargaretProfessor of Divinity andCanonof Christ Church, Oxford, and the Rev.A. C. Headlam, M.A., D.D., Principal of King's College, London.\NowReady.I. CORINTHIANS. The Right Rev. Arch Robertson, D.D., LL.D.,LordBishopofExeter,andRev.AlfredPlummer, D.D.,late Master ofUniversity College, Durham. \No'wReady,II. CORINTHIANS. The Rev. Dawson Walker, D.D., TheologicalTutorinthe UniversityofDurham.GALATIANS. The Rev. Ernest D. Burton. D.D., Professor of NewTestamentLiterature, UniversityofChicago.EPHESIANSANDCOLOSSIANS. The Rev. T. K. Abbott, B.D.,D.Litt., sometime Professor of Biblical Greek, Trinity College, Dublin,nowLibrarianof thesame.[NowReady.PHILIPPIANS AND PHILEMON. The Rev. Marvin R Vincent,D.D., Professor of Biblical Literature, UnionTheological Seminary,NewYorkCity.[NowReady.THESSALONIANS. The Rev.James E. Frame, M.A., Professor ofBiblicalTheology, UnionTheologicalSeminary,NewYorkCity.[/Press,THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. The Rev.Walter Lock, D.D.,WardenofKebleCollegeandProfessorof Exegesis, Oxford.HEBREWS. The Rev.James Moffatt, D.D., Minister United FreeChurch,BroughtyFerry, Scotland.ST.JAMES. TheRev.JamesH.Ropes,D.D.,BusseyProfessorofNewTestament Criticism in Harvard University.PETER ANDJUDE. TheRev.Charles Bigg,D.D., sometime RegiusProfessorof Ecclesiastical History and Canon of Christ Church, Oxford.\^N'owReady.THE EPISTLES OF ST.JOHN. TheRev. E. A.Brooke,B.D.,FellowandDivmity Lecturer in King's College, Cambridge.REVELATION. The Rev. Robert H.Charles,M.A.,D.D., sometimeProfessorof Biblical Greekin the Universityof Dublin.THE BOOK OF ISAIAHGEORGEBUCHANANGRAYVOL. IWlii ':"*\^'^."vA^.'o.II rIS,/i-c\i^\.A'iH(AThe International Critical CommentaryACRITICAL AND EXEGETICALCOMMENTARYONTHE BOOKOF ISAIAHI-XXXIXBYGEORGEBUCHANANGRAY, D.D, D.Litt.PROFESSOROK HEBREWANDOLDTESTAMENT EXEGESISIN MANSFIELDCOLLEGE, OXFORDXL-LXVIBYARTHUR S. PEAKE, D.D.RYLANDS PROFESSOR OF BIBLICAL EXEGESISIN THE UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTERINTWOVOLUMESVOL. IINTRODUCTION,ANDCOMMENTARYONI-XXVIINEV^YORKCHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS1912EGYPTSYRIAANDASSYEIAScale of English Milesso so 100 (SO 200 350Modern names are in thintypeCdmborght Londo.iThe RightsofTranslation andReproduction are ReservedPREFACE.ThisCommentaryshouldhavebeen written byanother;andall whoare inanywayfamiliar with thework ofthelate Dr. A. B. Davidson, and conscious of the profoundsympathyandpenetratinginsightthat healwaysbroughttotheinterpretation ofScripture,mustregretthat hehadmadenosubstantialprogresswiththeCommentary,whichtheeditorsofthis series hadentrusted tohim,at thetimewhenChristian scholarshipandChristian life wereleft thepoorerbyhis death.AfterDr. Davidson's death,the editors,with aviewtothespeediercompletionofthis series, decidedtomaketheCommentaryon Isaiah the work of two writers; and attheir request I undertook the preparation ofthe Com-mentary on chs. 1-39. For the present volume I am,then,entirelyresponsible; and, owingto the unequal sizeofthe two main parts of the Book of Isaiah, the con-clusion of my work must be held over for the secondvolume,which will also contain Dr. Peake's Commentaryonchs.40-66,completingthework.For the general Introduction to the entire book I amalso solely responsible, though Dr. Peake, who has readit, is in general agreement with it, and in particular withsuch references as it contains to chs. 40-66. The morespecial Introduction to those chapters will be written byhim,andappear in vol. ii. The second volumewill alsocontain full Indexestothewholework..I cannot claim, as 1 could in writing my Preface toV\JcrJTrjv ; cp.v.28)j thebookoftheprophet Isaiah(Lk4^'''fii^Xiovtov irpocfiyjTov*Thepassage is translated at length in Ryle, Canon,pp. 273f.TEXT ANDVERSIONS XXV'Hcratov): in(!5r^ thetitlerunsHcram?opafxaTLo-TO^s(rd. opafiaTiorTrjs)',butthe full title of EVdoesnotrest onMSauthority.Theformof the name in the Titlerfnty (Origen, Iee a clearmeaning. ... If historyrepeats itself, it seldom does so tosuch anextentthateverywordand phraseof a documentwritten in oneagewillbeequallysuitable to another: and for practical purposeit will usually beenough topointoutoneperiod of historytowhich such adocumentreallycorrespondsin all its parts." Unfortunately for this method, there is a vast differencebetween suitability to a particularageand suitability to what is known ofthesameage : a documentmayvery well correspond, ornot beinconsistentwith, what is knownof twoor three different periods of all of whichnextto nothing is known; andif the correspondencewith onlyone such periodis pointed out, a false impression of certainty or probability is necessarilygiven. Asamatterof fact, considerablepartsof theBookof Isaiaharenotinconsistent with what is known of more periods than one (cp. e.g. theintroductionto19^'^^): ifourknowledgewere increased,therangeof ambigu-ity mightbediminished;onthe other hand it mightbeincreased;for whathadseemedpeculiar toaparticular periodmaybeshownbyfullerknowledgeto have been common tomorethanone: till latelyan allusion toa JewishTempleinEgyptwouldhavecorresponded towhatwasknownof theperiodfromc. 160B.C. to73A.D. only; it is now known that therewasa JewishTempleinEgyptfrombefore ^2^downto411 B. C. also.44~57-The poeticalformsof the propheticliterature^andoftheBookofIsaiahin particular.44.Robert Lowth(1710-1787), sometime Professor ofPoetry in the University of Oxford and Bishop of London,rendered two great services to the critical study of the OldTestament. Herevealed byamasterlyanalysis the parallelisticstructure ofHebrewpoetry; andheperceivedthat thepropheticIx INTRODUCTIONliterature was poetical in form."^ Healso proved that in trans-lating from Hebrewpoetry it is possible to reproduce not onlythesense, butalsotheform, in sofar asthisdependsonparallel-ism;and in his translation of Isaiah he presented thepoeticalformof the original to the eye of his readers. In this hewasfollowedamongstothers byKoppe,whotranslatedhisIsaiahintoGerman, by Gesenius in the translation prefixed to his Com-mentary, and by the English scholar Henderson(1840). Un-fortunately this practice sufferedacheck; andeven in Cheyne'sCommentary,!whichin otherrespectsmarkeda notableadvancein the criticism and interpretation of the Book, the prophecieswere translated throughout in the form of prose: still moreunfortunately the RV(1885),whichpresented the Psalms,Job,andotherpoetical parts of the OTin poetical form, byprintingthe Prophets as prose, obscured the important fact that thegreaterpart ofthesebooks is nolesspoetical in formthaneitherPsalmsorJob.Parallelism is one of the forms of Hebrewpoetry: is it theonly one? Since the time of Lowth the question of Hebrewmetre, which he had treated as non-existent or irrecoverable,hasreceived repeated attention. Intothe general question%itis impossible to enter at length here; but it is necessary toexplain the principleonwhichtheformgivento thetranslations,andtheaccounttaken of metrein the Commentary,have beendecided.45.Inthetranslations the division into lines has been deter-minedprimarily by regard to parallelism : i.e. Lowth's methodhasbeenresumed. Thiswould bejustifiable even if themetrewerealways clearly to be recognisedwhich it is not; for therewould be no reason to adopt in translating from Hebrew amethodwhichforgoodreasonshas found no favourwith thosewho have translated the metrical lines of other poetry: intranslations (whicharenotthemselvesmetrical) from Homer orVergil, for example, it is not customary to distinguish in the*DeSacra PoesiHebraeorumPraelectiones(1753);AnewtranslationojIsaiah(1778).tThePropheciesof Isaiah (1880, 1882; ed.5, 1889).XCp.Harper,Amosand Hosea(inthis series),pp.clxiv-clxix, andW.H.Cobb,ACriticismof SystevisofHebrewMetre(1905), ausefulsurveyofthesubject, with(pp.191-202)anextensive bibliography.>POETICALFORMSOFTHEPROPHETICLITERATURE Ixitranslation thelines of the original; neither is thereanyreasonso to distinguish the Hebrew metrical lines if, or when, theselinesdonotcoincidewiththeperiods of parallelism, as Du., forexample, hasnotinfrequentlydone (see, e.g.^p.212 below, noteonthe structure of ii^'^).46.But parallelism is not a constant phenomenon ofHebrewpoetry: lines frequentlyoccurwhich arenotrelated totheir neighbours byparallelism of terms, or even by a generalparallelism of sense. What Lowth called "synthetic parallel-ism" (Dr. LOT363)is in reality absence of parallelism inlines suchasYet I have set my kingUpon Zion, my holy hill.Butin apoemwhichcontainsforthemost part lines parallel insense, theremainder of the poeminwhichparallelism is absenttends tofall intoperiodsofthesamelength. So,in theexamplejust cited,'t^'ip "in jv^-^ycontains two periods of the same length as the periods inv.^ of the same Psalm which are related to one another byparallelismD*"!: wy\ r\t:hIfan entirepoemcontainednoparallel lines, therewould benosoundreason for distinguishingthe lines in the English transla-tion;yet iftheend of the lines alwayscoincidedwith a pausein thesense, the line-division might be retained in Englishas aform of articulation; andwhen, as is most frequently the case,parallelism is sometimes present, sometimes (though generallyless frequently)absent, it is convenienttoshowthe line-divisionthroughout.This approximation to a similar length and rhythmicalcharacter in the periods of a poem is the best evidence thatparallelism is not the onlyform of Hebrewpoetry, but that itfollowed also certain rhythmical laws, howeverelastic thoselawsmayhavebeen.47.So far it is assumed that the rhythmical unit and theIxii INTRODUCTIONsense divisions in Hebrew poetry are identical; and that thatpoetryhasnothingtoshowlikeSing, Heavenly Muse, that, on the secret topOf Oreb, or of Sinai, didst inspireThat shepherd who first taught the chosen seedIn the beginning how the heavens and earthRose out of Chaos; or if Sion hillDelight thee more, and Siloa's brook that flowedFast by the oracle of God, I thenceInvoke thy aid to my advent'rous songinwhichpassagetherhythmicalunits regularly closewherethereisnosense-division,andthepausesof senseoccurinthemiddleoftherhythmicalunits. Iftheassumption is wrong,andif Sieversis right in hiscontention that" runon"lines dooccurevenwithfrequencyinHebrewpoetry, it mighthaveaconsiderablebearingontextual criticism ; but it would notaffect thecorrect methodofdividingthelines in an English translation : thesemightandshould still serve the useful purpose of clearly presenting theparallelistic structure coincidingwith sense-divisions.But the more elaborate metrical analysis of Hebrew texts,suchasBickellorSievers offers, rest ontooprecariousabasis tobemadeas yetasecureinstrumentevenoftextual criticism.48. Theprominentelementin Hebrewpoetryistheaccentedsyllable; the laws that governed the number of unaccentedsyllables thataccompaniedit are obscure,though it is obviouslyanover-statement,asCobb{op. cit. 123 f.) causticallypoints out,to saythat thenumberofunaccentedsyllables was" amatterofno consequence" (Harper, Amos and Hosea^p.clxvii). Wemay, then, at the present stage of investigations into Hebrewmetre, obtain a provisional determinant ofrhythm in Hebrewpoetrybyobservingtheaccentedsyllables. Eachword, oreachcomplex of words united by makkeph, represents, generallyspeaking, a single-wordaccent; it maybethat in some cases inawordof five ormoresyllables thesecondaryaccent also ranksasaword-accent,andthat, e.g. iD!?'nT Ps 2^, Dnm^nyi Isloi^d,contains notoneaccentonly, buttwo. Seeing that MTcannomorebetrustedin its particularapplicationsofmakkephthaninPOETICALFORMSOFTHEPROPHETICLITERATURE Ixiiirespectof thevowels, it will beseen thatthere is roomeven inthis simplerdetermination ofrhythmfornolittle uncertainty.49.Broadlyspeaking, thelines ofHebrewpoetryare relatedto one another in oneof twoways : theyareequal, or theyareunequal; in the one case we have a balancing rhythm^ in theotheranechoingrhythm;forexample, in i^vf>j;a D)3x -nompnnn^^dj;thelines in each couplet balanceoneanother; eachline of thefirst couplet certainly contains three accents; each line of thesecond couplet also contains three accents, if MT is right,andit probablyis so, in leavingthe ^in each lineunconnectedbymakkephwiththeverb; if themakkeph is inserted the linesstill balance, but the length of each is two accents. In theone case the couplet may be described as3:3,in the otheras 2 : 2.50.Examples of echoing rhythm* are found later in thesame chapter, especially in vv.^^"^^, and also, e.g.^ in132-8 14^-21;J21. 26. 27jnayserveas examples :njir^ nn>n na^xno 'Z. r^ t^Vj VjfaoOOpqM-i I a> el)-'-' >->__ri _n C (Sii"c>-;i2'?oC3^(U(AOs J:tW ^ . i-i -i-iu.J 1= >^ Z. -^rta>J'in00 00OO t^-^ in -^ 00\^t^ CO1^XCVlll INTRODUCTIONiTpq00 "rT 'n'oO G^4)^ ocrid a'OacSS2JJ O OJ . 1203TO >^Cr)>> c*< -5CQiL, pqN Ncr:^(tf>% tf)rO)- udx: a>PQ ^PU.2>VmV hn)denotes rov KXTyo-a/Acvov (ffi^), onewho has come into possessionof anything as, for example, bypurchase(cp. Lv 25^^, Zee 11^);the second(^V^)is commonly used of the person to whomproperty belongs {e.g. Ex 21^8,Jg1922).Israef] If vv.^ and^belongto the samepoem, Israel is not the Northern kingdom,butJudah: cp. 5^n.4-9. Israel sinful and suffering.Isaiah, like Amosint33-8,followsupthebriefsayingof Yahweh(vv.2see, further, G-K.144/: Konig,Stilistik, 248ff. : on3^*^see n. on 3*. r does not render the 2ndvb.;^=1^; iSH read both vbs. in the 1st pers.'and k not infrequently areconfused;andit is certainlyeasier to emend the 2ndvb. to "lonnNi thanwithCond. the1stvb. toisnm. 21. in'^cDo] n'?B'DD is usedfromtheendofthe7thcent, onwards; see Cheyne, Introd. 137n.24.niyss]some ignobleflavourmay attach to the word, if it is from the same root as j;3S, _iJ, cp. Dt 2^^,Ps 20^69^091I4139^, Pr18^^2925) to be taken, challenging His soleexaltation(cp.2^^12^33^),and has brought low (cp.2^* 1^)its inhabitants^whodeemedthemselveshighupoutofharm'sway, securein theheight{q,'^.33I6,Ps75*^); Hehasgivenoverthecitytobetrampledunderfoot (cp. Mai3^1(4^))of the righteous Jewswhombyitsoppressionit hadmade,andin its prideregarded,2&poor{2^^n.)andneedy (3^^^-)*I. ntfv]Hoph. hereonly;"^"Wwas probablymeanttobeHiph. : cp.^ (pi. asin 25^).13*7TV -I'y] MT\h-\v "I'V, the cityis astrengthforus, butmakkeph rather, ^'h ly-Ty (cp. Pr 18^). (&% om. \h;(& prefixes lho{) (adittographof'Ioi;5[a/as]?). noin n^ty' r\^w'\ on the alternativeconstructionspossible, seeDr. 195. NotethetwoassonancesniB" nj;iB'' and "rm nioin.2. nri](J&^ om. 1D'3DX] Pr 13" 14520(Ps 3i2M): sing. Dt 3220^3.nxn. . .IS'] anotherassonance. For "i!' Origen's Hexapla haslearpo, i.e.440COMMENTARYON ISAIAHins': the suffixwouldrefer to p'l:^('U),andthefirst twowordsofthev. wouldbenotanace. clause butasentence. "I'^ty di'^b'] the second i^b' is probablyadittograph : butseeLieb."^2'3] |^^333 (cp.8^n.) may havebeenanerrorfor33 =i3 '5, andisnaboveanerror for i^" : thenYahwehwouldbereferredto in this v. asthroughoutvv.^"^ in the 3rd pers. mB3]pass, part., trusting',cp. Ps112'',and see Kon. iii.235^;for the omission of the subj. see Dr. 135(6).4. D'oSiy mji mrrn'3 '3]ffi 6 ^e6s 6 /x^7as 6 a/ciwos ; n'3-3, prob-ablyabsent from ^'s text, maybe a corruption ofnin'3, a correct marginalvariant of mn', Trustye in Yahwehfor ever^ in Yahweh the everlastingRock. iTS '3would involve a remarkable use of^: see BDB89 a(top).5.DITD '3t5"] according to Marti this is a playonthename piDB' : cp.25^n.Cp.25^^^, which may consist mainly of variants on this v. n^'SB'' nj^'sc"]probablyanothercaseofdittography. (&.hasno equivalentforpNnyhjS'Sk'';ontheotherhand, at thebeginningof the v. raweiviJbffas Kari^yayes is morethanequivalentto ntsri andperhapsrepresents h'SHfn nvn(cp.25^2i^ySucha reading in itself would be, on grounds both of rhythm and parallelism,altogetherimprobable;but it is barelypossible that v.^originallyconsistedof two3:3distichs:D"no 'aB" nBTTOn3V ny njyj'6. njoann]the3rdrhymeis a|-v-within afewwords.'VnVjn]anothercaseofdittography? But the mere omission of ^:n ((E^S) would leave therhythmirregular. Lieb. rejects hi") and conjecturally supplies nj3"nn after D'^t : thiswould make v.^ a distich3: 3. The sing. vb. might stand before eitherhi-i sing, or(G-K. I45>^) 'Vjt pi.'3]}] readn"jy: cp. D^Vi, andsee (!&.7-1 1. Waiting for Yahweh's discriminating judg-ments.7'^^^ makes for the righteousasmoothwayof Hfefreefrom stumbling-blockssuchascumberthewayof thewickedand cause them to fall : the righteous thus pass through lifeeasily and free from disaster. Cp. for the phraseology orideasof thev., Ps i^, Pr3^4^^ 5^-21 nS.It is most improbablethat IC^^ refers to God, T/iou that art upright(RV); butonthetext see phil. n.8. Speaking in the name of the community,thewriter claims that they have patiently and longinglywaited(25^)for the manifestation ofYahweh'spower.Forthe pathofThyjudgme7its\ this entire clause is perhaps made up of adittograph from path in v.*^, and a gloss {Thyjudgments) onThy name'y the original rhythm of v.^ would then have beennormal(3:3);or, if therhythmwasabnormal(3:3:3)theclausemaybe taken as theobject of the vb. emphatically placed first,and then resumed by an equivalent expression (cp. Dr. 197,Obs.2); but either Thee(f^),or Thy name (ffi) would be aXXVI. 4-11441Strange permutative of the pathofthy judgments. Reading'\V'\\> we might render, For thepath . . . have wewaited ; Forthy nameand forthy memorial^ etc. ; but this (like MT, RV)would give a very abnormal rhythm(4 : 4),and would crowdtwo parallel terms into a single line.Name . . . memorial']the expressions aresynonymous : seeEx3^^, Ps30^(*\Yahwehmakes Hisnameremembered(Ex 20^4)by some striking mani-festation ofHispresenceandpower.Thedesireofoursoul] this,thereading of (&,is doubtless correct: it is tacitlyadopted byRV.1^omitsour.9. Reinforcesv.^; but, ifJ^is correct, withatransitionfromthe ist pi. to the ist sing., suchas often occursin thePsalms: see, e.g.^ Ps44^-5(*-6).In the night] cp.21^1^-Within me] cp. Zee 12^, Ps 39* 55^(*^109^2.^omits thewordaltogether.9c. d. e, 10. Thedesireforthe manifestationof Yahweh's judgment or power is based on experience(yi\:hpf. ofexperience) : whenthejudgmentsofGodnolongerremainhighoutof sight of the wicked(Ps 10^), allowing himto flatterhimself that he can sin on with impunity, but come down toearth, then the inhabitants of theworldat large learn righteous-ness, though thewicked donot doso, with the result that thewicked are punished (Ps918(17)),Something like this seemsto be intended, iff^is in the main correct; but the textof5^and (& differ considerably, and the original text cannotbedetectedwithanycertainty,andsomeofthemoreexactturnsof thought remain very obscure; but apparently this writerdistinguishes, whereas theauthorof Ps9^^seemsto identify, theinhabitantsofthe world (18^), i.e. the heathen nations,andtheunrighteous. Convinced by Yahweh's judgmentsof His power andGodhead,thenationslearnrighteousnessoflife fromtheGodoftheJews(cp.22-^).But there is a class of wicked peoplewhopersistently shut their eyes (5^2y\.) to the majestyofYahweh(12^)andrefuse to learn and followthe wayapprovedbyHim,though theylive in the landofuprightness. If the last phrasemeans,asitprobablydoes,thelandofJudah,thentheunrighteousofv.i^arenotheathen (13^^ i4^^") butJews, andthemeaningis:whenYahwehmanifests His power theveryheathen will adoptHis ways; but the ungodly Jews are past recovery in theirwickedness,and(v.^) will have no right of entry intoJerusalem.[No] favourshallbeshown]for the conjectureandviewsofthecstr., see phil. n.f^might be translatedshall the unrighteous442COMMENTARYON ISAIAHreceive favour'i (No), hehathnot^ etc.Inthetranslation aboveof vv.^*=--^^5^is closely followed;an alternative translationbasedona text tentativelyreconstructedwith reference to ^aswellas toJ^and to rhythmicalconsiderations is nowgiven:^For thyjudgments are a light;The inhabitants of the worldHave learnt righteousness (cp.60^"^).^^The unrighteous shall cease to beThat learnt not righteousnessIn the land of uprightness.The wicked shall be taken away (cp.57^),And shall not seeThe majesty of Yahweh (cp. 2423).II. Thewicked (v.^^) donotyet perceivethepowerofYahweh,that it isHewho really achieves all things (v. 12^, but theysoonwill see it is to theirconfusion : Yahwehwill consumethemwithfire (cp.30^^ 33^^)-Thy hand is exalted] cp. Dt 32^7; theupHftedhandis powerin action as thedroppedhandis absenceofpower, orpower heldin check;cp. 2 S4^ 17^24^^.Lined.omitted from the translation above is corrupt; instead of thethreewords required bythe metrical structure twoonlysurviveinf^:^,f^XosXYjixij/eTaL \aov aTratSevTov, mayhave hadmorejbutsee Lieb.^makesnosense, whether connectedwithwhatprecedes (cp. RV) or with what follows. It is altogetherimprobable, apartfromthe violationdonetherebyto theregularmetrical structure of the poem, thatDV nN3p,jealousyforthepeople^ is ace. to theyshallsee (line a.) in spite of the intransitivevb. intervening, so that the sentence would read they shallsee^andbeashamed^thejealousyforthe people, Mic 7^^, towhichDi.appeals, is agood parallel for thegeneralsense, noneat all forsuch an extraordinary construction. RV really implies twoconjectural emendationsthetransposition of the two vbs. Itn^and ItJ'nS and"Joyfor Dy. Others take Dj; nx:ip, or, emending,joy n5.,theJews, orjealousy(9^)displayed byYahwehfor (cp. Ps 69^^)XXVI. 7-14443theJews.Originally line d. probablyconsisted of threewords,andwasparallel in senseto line e.{^)as translated above.7,The V. contains seven words, whereas the rhythm requires but six.IK'' in its presentposition isnotsatisfactorily accountedfor,whetherexplainedasavocativeaddressed toGod,as in apposition to thesubj. ofoSsn, orasasecondace. to that vb. Du., al. thereforereject it. More probablyne''isthemisplaced parallelto pn:in lineb. ;omit p'njs'?, which,coming up fromlineb.pn5S[jyD], droveoutnc',andread ncj" mx. Forotherexamplesofaccidentalrepetitionsofthesameterm totheexclusionof oneof thesynonymoustermsin parallel lines, see 24^ n.11^n. 8. Tinp] read with Lowth, al. irip.f]Knin' "I'tJSB'D n-iN]ffii] yap 656s Kvplov Kpiais.^2:] Cr.SE 1365'S3 : inf^thesuffix waslost before 'B'sj.9a.b. (Somitsin'iN 't^Ba, f\K,and'anpa, butadds6 debsat theendofb.f^is to bepreferred."nin . . . -csj]eachwordis a**doublesubject";10^*'n."jinK'N] (& dpdpii^ei; but it is questionabletoreadonthisaccount "iinu'n andabove l^jxvbs. 3rd sing. fem. ntfXD '3] didri6/3ova-ov : for the phrase, cp. e.g. 64^(63^^), Jer4^^. 18. Whenwegave birth, (loI) wind] rhythmically the words appear to besuperfluous,and theymaybea gloss intended to complete thefigureso as tomake it applicable to the two following linesall our distress issued in wind, i.e. nothing; cp. 41^9, Ec i^*.Ges. discusses at length thesupposedreference to thesymptomsof pseudo-pregnancy.l8b. CWe could not, as Yahweh canandwill (v.^), deliver our countryfrom the enemy: the inhabit-antsofthe world (v.^), who were all attacking us, did notfallbefore us in battle. This interpretation gives to the linesparallelism. Modern commentators,! however, have generallygiven to the line c. another sense: inhabitantsofthe world,"an artificial poetical expression" (Du.), meaning"young,new-born'mortals'" (Del.), do notfall, viz. from the womb,i.e, are not born. On either interpretation the phraseology is*e.g. Ki., Ges., Del.tCoccejus, Ges., Del., Di., Cheyne, Du., Marti.44^COMMENTARYON ISAIAHunusual. There is no direct evidence thatf>Q3 in the Kalmeantto be born;yet it is not improbable that it did; for theHiph. probably means to give birth to in v.^^, the noun ^D3means an untimely birth^ and the Arabic kii^;, to fall^ alsomeansto beborn; see illustrations of the lastand of the GreekTrtTTTO), KaTaTTLTTTo) (Wis7 2) in Gcs.IQ.(Ec'g tcxt Is shortcr byone, andpossibly by twowords(see phil. n.) thanJ^: and oneof the lines a.-d. maybe an addition (seenoteon therhythm),but the essential idea is expressed more than once. TheJewswhohavediedwill notshare thecommon lot ofman(v.^^), buttheywill rise from their graves, not as spirits of the dead, butbodily, and toresumewith gladness life upon the earth, in thenew vast territory of the Jews (v.^^). This remarkable expres-sion of what must have been already a well-defined and clearbelief in abodilyresurrection of Jewswhohad died before theNewAge began (cp. Dn 12^), forms an abrupt but effectiveclose to the poem; abrupt, for v.^^ would naturally have hadas its sequence a repetition of the opening thought: thou,Yahweh, will secure our safety : what we could not achieve.Thou wilt; effective, for it uses the belief in resurrection withall its emotional richness at onceasananswer to thequestionhowshall thenation be increased (v.^^), and asaclimax to thewhole poem.Thy dead] Yahweh is still addressed: Yahwehsdead are those who died loyal to Him,or evenwere slain forHissake(cp.Ps4723(24))"mortui tui, qui interfecti suntpropterte"(Jer.).Shalllive] notmaythey live(Di.), even iftheimpera-tives ofJ^in line d. are correct; but even if^^^'^were takenoptatively, the remainder of the verse shows that we have notto deal with a hope in resurrection that is merely breakingthrough, as inJob,but with a belief well established in thecircle towhich thewriter belonged, though not necessarily, norprobably, throughout the entire nation (ct. Eccles. and laterthe Sadducees), which included wicked unbelievers in this, asin other things, that the power of Yahweh could achieve.Their corpses] ^my corpses, i.e. the dead bodies of thewriter'sfellow-countrymenj but the expression would be unnatural.Thewriteremphasisesthe belief that theactual bodythat diedwill be revivified, that it is nomereghost that is toarise; andthesame idea is implicit in the next line, theythatdwellin theXXVI.19447dust (cp.Job2i26j Ps 22^^), now sleeping there the sleep ofdeath (cp. Dn 12^), which is nottobeforthemeternal(Jer51^9,Job14^^), willawakeandring out their joy.Shallawakeandgivearingingcry] cp. ^ :J^Awake,and give , . , yethatdwellsetc.,whichmakestheclauseanaddressto thedead,interpolatedbetween clauses addressed to Yahweh.For thedewof , , isthydew]God's dew, or more strictly night-mist{\Z^\ faUing onthegraves of His dead,and, descending to the bodies that restthere, will cause themto live again; in the caseof God's deadthere is not the difference thatJobbewailed between thevege-table world, which, when apparentlydead, is revived bywater,and man(Job14"^"^^),who, once dead, cannot revive. For theimportance of the dew or night-mist for the life of vegetationin Palestine, see18*n. Ges. quotes parallels to the thoughtofthemoisteningofthedead bodywith rain : e,g."visit Ma'anand sayto his grave. Maythe morning cloudswater theewithrain upon rain." The definition of the dew that is to restorelife tothedeadJewsis unfortunatelyobscure; f^and CJr differJ^mit?,^HDlfc^ or DnD^^^ (see phil. n.). If^was correct weshould render literallyforthydewis thedewof{their)newflesh;asGodrevives thevegetableworldbydew, soHewill causenewflesh to sprout(58^)andcovertheskeletons (cp. Ezk37 6) oftheJews now lying in the grave, thus preparing them for re-birth(cp. Ps 139^2-16)^The meaning ofJ^is obscure:mK in2 K43^1 is a term for herbs, hence the rendering ofEVhere,"thedewofherbs,"whichshouldmean that the dewthat is tofall onthedead will beas reviving in theircaseas the dewthatfalls on herbs (Ki.)veryimprobable. Most modern commen-tators see in mis^ an intensive pi. of mix(Ps 139^2^ Est8^^)and in thedewoflight "thedewof the highestheavenlyregion,whereis the light withwhichYahwehwrapsHimself"(Ps104^),as Marti explains, or, light and life being "interchangeableideas" (Ps5614(13)^Job3203330)^ as Di. puts it, the dew thatrestores to the life of light.Theearth shallgive birth to {the)shades] the rendering is not certain : on f)^Dn, to give birth to,seeV.18n,. ^'gtext ofi^cleadsup to the ideaof birth. Shadesare in v.^* dead men in general, here deadJews. Otherrenderings labour under the disadvantage of giving the line apoorer connection, and shades an entirely different sense fromthat in v.^* : thus andthe landofthe Rephaim^ i.e. giants {e.g.448COMMENTARYON ISAIAHDt 2"), regarded as impious(S), dost thou bring down (inruin).12. niJCTi] nsiy with the meaning to appoint(ffi, 56s) occurs here onlyinOT; in 2K4^^, Ezk24', Ps22^^tn3B' has other meanings : seeBDB.13.IDB' I'DTJ lann"? "inSii D'jix iJiSya] (i) everywhere else nSn is used with anegative; (2)innn'? cannot be satisfactorily explained : Di. treats 13 as theobject (cp.48^Ps20^) prefixed to I'Dii, IDB' beingin apposition to it; Ges.,al. make13meanbymeansofthee^ofthyhelp. Inthetext offfi both thesedoubtful pointsdisappear : r reads KTrjcai rj/nas- eKrbsaovaWovovk oida/nep,TO6vofid aovovo/idfo/xej', whichrepresentsnot^(cp. Lieb.),but: IDC noijIisirhi in*?!? |'nkMhi^iBeourowner,OLord;Weacknowledgenonebeside thee,Wemakementionofthyname.Wemightadoptthis, but that it givesusnoantecedent for the 3rd pi. pro-nounofv.^^(DTDrm). Thiswe could obtain, though in a rather bareway,by reading D^jnx 13^;;? : Lords {i.e. other lords) have ownedus, {but) nonebesidetheedoweacknowledge. For rh'\^ =nonebeside, cp. i K12^^, 2K24^!15.pN' 'i:^p h^ npmmnDJ 'u*? nso' mn^ "^h nso'] (& v-pdades avrots /ca/cd,K6pi, Tpdadeskukcl tois ivdd^oLs ttjs yrjs. Towhat extent fflr's text differedfromf^is notclear;it doesnotseem to have been in anyrespect superior.Onrand various unconvincing emendations that have been proposed, seeLieb.f^probablypreserves the sense, though if we may assume that tlierhythm was regular throughout the poem, "'uS nsD' m.T is an amplificationofthe original text. 16. inps] r eixv-qadrjv (HP 14i/xvrjadrj/xev) (rou =?1J?")5Tor ?li15? ; Cheyne, li[3]ips ; Lieb. ^'l^ips. nps occurs here only of man'sseeking God.idS inoiD tynV ])p:i] for id*? read isV : so ffir ijijuvy and cp. 1stplural in vv.^^'-1'**.en"? ppii is also corrupt; not only is the meaningcommonlyextracted fromf^most questionable (see above), buttheformofthe3rd perfectpi. with]isanomalousandopento thegravest suspicioneveninthelatest OTliterature: seeDr.6, Obs.n., andG-K.44/.The anomalousform is avoided, but a sense no more probable is obtained, if wepoint jip^t^n^, andassumethatpp^isa dw. \ey. having the samemeaningas npi:^ (S^-)orpsiD (8-^), and render constrai^it such as is enforced by a charm wasthychastisement (Koppe, Di.). Cr iv ^Xt^ei iiLKpa scarcely =|^,but it isambiguous, perhaps \rh jiap? Cheyne, modifying a suggestion of Houb.,proposesj'n'?D ijpys(cp. 65") ;Lieb. (who discusses other less probablesuggestions) ['n"? npis. Lieb.'s emendationof^*'''" **keeps nearest to the evi-denceof^and fficombined: Cheynegiveswhatappearstobeasenserathermoresuitable to the context.17.V'nn] absent from ffir : it is rhythmicallysuperfluous, and is probablyanaddition made out of regard for 'S'hn below.18. nnmS'idd] idd (^ickd,Gn 191^) is absentfrom ffir.iViJ'-Vni] fflr dXXdTreaovuTanravTes: see Lieb. 19.nsy 'J3K' "i3Jm 'i^'pnppip^ "nhn: yno vn-](&^dvaffTTiaovrai {^+yap) oi vcKpol Kai eyepdrjaovrai oi iv tois fjivtifieloisKol eiKppaudrja-oprai oi iv rrj yrj;perhaps this is = (or l^'p'i) pDip' rhiy\ DTIDVn'isy '33B> i:ni;but ffir clearly renders one word less than at presentXXVI. 12-19, XXVI. 20- XXVII. I449standsin|^.Cheynehasargued that the original text of rendered twowords less, arguing that the overlined words are doublets, each rendering"lay 'JDB' ; but this is far from certain, for oi iv to2s fivrjfjLeiois is an admirablerenderingfor nhiiinapassagewhereitscommonequivalentueKpoihasalreadybeenused. Norinviewof 38^ is it certain that 6.va.(Try](jovTo.i = poip' (as inv.")rather than vn\ynn] fflD^riD :^is to be preferred.'nVna] the un-suitable'is derived bydittographyfrom the following pDip'; but r\h2i(? (&)is scarcely the original reading, rather Dn733(^).nVna is frequently usedcollectivelyashere.^:p.]'2i'pn] read^3311 ^s'p; (cp.