//./3, J2 5 
 
 LIBRARY OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY 
 
 PRINCETON. N. J. 
 
 
 Presented by 
 
 
 TKeWid^v^ oT U'eorde!BL\ob\n , 
 
 '% 
 
 Division...l^.Z>.^ 1 A 
 
 
 ,L.2_1(£5 
 
 
 Section .\r.....V.1- 
 
 
 O0|»>j'^ 
 
 
A 
 
 COMMENTAKY 
 
 ON THE 
 
 HOLY SCRIPTURES: 
 
 CRITICAL, DOCTRINAL AND HOMILETICAL, 
 
 WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO MINISTERS AND STUDENTS. 
 
 BY 
 
 JOHN PETER LANGE, D.D. 
 
 IN CONNECTION WITH A NUMBER OF EMINENT EUROPEAN DIVINES. 
 
 TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN, REVISED, ENLARGED, AND EDITED 
 
 BT 
 
 PHILIP SOHAFF, D.D. 
 
 ASSISTED BT AMERICAN SCHOLAES OF VARIOUS EVANGELICAL DENOMINATIONS. 
 
 VOL. XII. OP THE OLD TESTAMENT: CONTAINING JEREMIAH AND LAMENTATIONS. 
 
 NEW YORK: 
 
 CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, 
 
 1899 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2010 with funding from 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary Library 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/lamentationsofje122ng 
 
THE 
 
 0^ Cf />; 
 NOV - 
 
 LAMENTATIONS 
 
 07 
 
 JEREMIAH. 
 
 THEOLOGICALLY AND HOMILETICALLY EXPOUNDED 
 
 Dr. c. w eduard naegelsbach, 
 
 Pastor in Bayreuth Bavaria. 
 
 TRAJfSLATED, EMLARQEB, AJfD EDITED 
 
 BY 
 
 WM. H. HORNBLOWER, D.D. 
 
 VBOrXSBOB OF SACBES RHETORIC, CHURCH GOVKRNMENT, AND PASTORAL THEOLOOY IN WE8TERK inEOLOOICA* 
 
 SKMISART. ALLEGHENY, PA. 
 
 NEW YORK: 
 CHARLES SCRIBXER'S SONS, 
 
Entkred, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1870, by 
 CHARLES SCRIBNER, 
 
 In the Clerk's Office «f the District Court of the United States for the Southern District 
 
 of New York. 
 
 TfiCA'3 
 
 PRINTING AND BOOKBINDING COMPANY, 
 
 NEW rORK. 
 
TBE 
 
 LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 INTBODUCTIOR. 
 
 2 1. NAME, PLACE IN CANON, LITURGICAL USE. 
 
 1. In Hebrew MSS. and editions this book is called H^'N, i. e., How! from the first word in 
 it (as Proverbs and the Books of the Pentateuch are designated by their initial words), which 
 word also begins chs. ii. and iv., and thus appears to be a characteristic of the Book.* The 
 Kabbins called it ^U'D, i. e., nenice, dirges, elegies, elegies, lamentations. ^}^^. is found in the 
 Old Testament in 2 Sam. i. 17; Amos v. 1 ; viii. 10; Jer. vii. 29; ix. 19; Ejek. ii. 10; xix. 1, 
 14 ; ixvi. 17 ; xxvii. 2, 32 ; xxviii. 12 ; xxxii. 2, 16 ; 2 Chron. xxxv. 25. In Ezek. ii. 10 the 
 plural form D'^p is used, and in 2 Chron. xxxv. 25 ^irp. The Septuagint always translates 
 this word i?p^o?, -dpfivoi, whence are derived the Latin names Threni, Lamentationes, La- 
 menta.f 
 
 2. Since Josephus, con. Apion, I. 8, states the number of the books of Holy Scripture as 
 twenty-two, and divides them into three classes, the first consisting of the Pentateuch, the se- 
 cond of thirteen prophetical books, and the third of four books which contained v/ivovg ng tov 
 ^Eov Kal rolg avdpcmoig vTvodr^Kag tov fiiov [" hymns to God and precepts for the conduct of human 
 life "], it is evident that he included the Lamentations, not in the D'^inJ [Hagiographa], but 
 m the prophetical Scriptures, and hence that he appended it to the Prophecies of Jeremiah. 
 The same classification and estimated number of these books are found in the canon of Melito 
 (Etjseb. Eccl. Hist., IV. 26), where the Lamentations are not expressly named, but are evi- 
 dently reckoned with the Prophetical Books, as they are in the Treatise of Origen on the oldest ca- 
 non (EuSEB., Hist. Eccl., VI. 25), where it is said 'lepe/uiar avv -Bpipoiq Kal ttj eTnaroTifi kv ivl 'lepe- 
 (lia, — so also H1LAEIU.S PiCTAV. {Prolog, to the Psalms), Rupintjs {Expos. Symboli ApostoL), 
 the Council of Laodicea, can. &Q (see Herz. R.-Enc, VIII., p. 199) Epiphan., De mens, et 
 ■pond. cap. 22, 23 {0pp. II., 180, ed. Petav.), the canons of the African Si/nods of 393 {Can. 
 36, Mansi III. 924) and 397 ( Can. 47, Mansi III. 891), Augustine {De doct. Christ., II. 8) and 
 by Jerome in the Prolog. Galeat., where likewise the Lamentations are not mentioned, but are 
 evidently appended to the Prophetical Book, for after the enumeration of the twenty-two books 
 he says, '' Some would include Ruth and Lamentations in the Hagiographa, and by adding these 
 compute the whole number of books as tweniy-four, etc." — Another method of enumeration 
 and classification was gradually adopted by the Jews, the first trace of which we find in Vol. 4 
 of Ben Ezra, 4, 44, where the ninety-four (this, without doubt, is the correct reading) sacred 
 books are divided into two classes of seventy and twenty-four books. The twenty-four books, 
 
 * [The word is especially proper as indicating the subject and tone of its contenti. Gerlach]. 
 f [Syriac, Arabic and later versions bear similar titles]. 
 
INTRODUCTION TO THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 manifestly, are the canonical ones. The Talmud also, in the Treatise Baba Bathra FoL^ 14 b. 
 enumerates twenty-four books, probably in accordance with the number of letters of the Greek 
 alphabet, which was made to correspond with the Hebrew alphabet by adding to the latter the 
 double yod, '", that was used to express with reverence the name of Jehovah. The Talmud 
 now reckons the Lamentations among the Hagiographa, which it arranges in the following order, 
 Ruth, Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Soiomoa's Song, Lamentations, Daniel, Esther, Ezra 
 (with Nehemiah), Chronicles. The Masorites introduced a third modification, arranging the Ha- 
 giographa thus, — Chronicles, Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ruth, Canticles, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, 
 Esther, Daniel, Ezra. But only the Spanish manuscripts preserve this order. T'.s ': ermau 
 give the order thus, — Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Canticles, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, xlsther, 
 Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, Chronicles. This is the usual order in our Hebrew editions of the Bible. 
 — In the Septuagint, the various recensions of which differ from each other, another principle of 
 arrangement prevails. This depends generally on the distinction of the books into historical, po- 
 etical and prophetical, in which order they succeed each other. But Lamentations is added to 
 the prophetical book of Jeremiah. The Latin versions follow the same order, both the Itala and 
 Vulgate. The Council of Trent has sanctioned this arrangement, in Deer. L, Sessio IV., where 
 the Lamentations, without being mentioned, are reckoned with the Prophetical Book of Jere- 
 miah. Our Protestant Bibles assign the book to the same place. 
 
 3. The Masoretic arrangement of the Hagiographa, in separating from the other books and 
 placing together the five Megilloth [or festival rolls, which were appointed for rehearsal on cer- 
 tain feast and memorial days], — is purely conjectural. For not earlier than the Masorites do we 
 find these five books placed together. The order of the German manuscripts is accommodated to 
 the succession of holy-days. On this account the Song of Solomon comes first, because it was 
 read at Easter; tnen follows Ruth (Whitsuntide); then the Lamentations. These were read on 
 the ninth of Ab, on which day the Jews commemorated the destruction of both the first and se- 
 cond Temples. (SeeHERZOG,i?.-^nc.,Vn.p,254). — As the Israelites haveappointed the Lamen- 
 tations for that great mourning festival, it is also a rule with them that an Israelite, when 
 mourning a death, read no other book than Job and Lamentations. (Herz., R.-Enc, XVI. p. 
 364). — In the Romish Church, passages out of the Lamentations are read on the last three days 
 of Holy-week. Three lessons are assigned to each one of the three days; the lessons are, on 
 Maundy-Thursday, I. i. 1-5, II. i. 6-9, III. i. 10-14; on Good Friday, I. ii. 8-11, II. ii. 12-15, 
 III. iii. 1-9; on Saturday, I. iii. 22-30, II. iv. 1-6, III. v. 1-11. Every lesson concludes, by 
 way of response and versicle, with the words, Jerusalem, Jerusalem, eonvertere ad Domimim 
 Deum tuum, turn to the Lord thy God. (See Officium hebdomadce sanctce, Separat-Abdruck 
 aus Dr. Reischl's Passionale. Munchen, 1857. Die Qharwoche in ihren Ceremonien und Ge- 
 beten, herausg. mil Gutheissung des bischbfl. Ordinariats, Speier, 1856. Neumann, Jeremias 
 von Anatot. II., S. 486). With reference to the musical execution of the L imentations in Holy- 
 week at Rome, see Die Reisebnefe von Felix Mendelsohn-Bartholdy, Leipzig, 1861, S. 166 
 flf. [Brief an Zelter in Berlin). In the Evangelical Church Ludecus and Lossius have ar- 
 ranged passages of the Lamentations for Divine service during the solemnities of Holy-week, 
 the former for the solemnities of the last three days, the latter only for the solemnity of the 
 Sunday in Holy-week. And Nicolaus Selnecker has liturgically arranged the whole of the La- 
 mentations in the German language (in his Kirchen-Gesdnge, 1587), not for Holy -week, but for 
 the festival of the Tenth Sunday after Trinity (the destruction of Jerusalem). Further on thia 
 subject, see ScHoBEELEiN, Schalz des liturg. Ghor-und-Gemeindegesanges, II., S. 444 flf. 
 
 § 2. CONTENTS AND STRUCTURE. 
 
 1. The general subject of the Lamentations is the destruction of Judah and Jerusalem by the 
 Chaldeans. That this book is a joropAecy of the destruction of Jerusalem, as Tremellius and 
 others have asserted (see Forster, Comm. in Thr., p. 5), is an utterly groundless opinion, which 
 we mention only for curiosity's sake.* Similar Songs of lamentation, having for their subject 
 
 • [This assertion of iMer groundlessness is rather strong. 2 Chron. xxxv. 25 and the declaration of Josephus (Ant. B. X^ 
 ch. V. 1 1 ) atford some ground on which to rest the hypothesis, tliat tliese Lamentations are the elegy written on the death 
 •f Josiah, and that they asenmed the form of a propliecy of the utter destruction of the city, which Josiah might have pre- 
 
§ 2. CONTENTS AND STRUCTURE. 
 
 the death of individual persons, or political catastrophes, occur in the Old Testament. See the 
 citations in § 1, 1. But no lamentation of equal length and so artistically constructed is now ex- 
 tant. The peculiar structure which is common to all these songs shows that they all have one 
 general subject. In Song I., the poet himself is the first speaker, vers. 1-11 5, whilst he intro- 
 duces to us Zion [Jerusalem] * as an ideal person. He pictures here the sad consequences of 
 the destruction, whilst he indicates the causes of the same (ver. 8). In the second half of the 
 cLixpter (vers. 11 c. — 22) the personified Jerusalem herself speaks, portraying her misfortunes un- 
 der manifold images, explainmg their causes and praying for help and vengeance. In Song II., 
 in the first part of it, the poet himself speaks, (a) ascribing the destruction to the agency of the 
 Lord (vers. 1-9), (6) depicting the consequences of the destruction (vers. 10-12), (c) addressing 
 the object of the destruction, namely, the personified Jerusalem, expressing his grief, his opinion 
 as to the causes of the catastrophe, and exhorting her to prayer (vers. 13-19). To this exhorta- 
 tion Zion, here represented by the wall of Jerusalem [Zion], responds in a prayer breathing the 
 deepest and acutest sorrow (vers. 20-22). In Song III., which evidently forms the climax of the 
 whole, the poet introduces as speaking that man, who in those troublous times had suffered more 
 than all others, and consequently had attained, as it were, to the very summit of the common 
 calamity, for he had suffered not only from the enemy what was common to all, but also from 
 his own people and associates, a thing unheard of save in this particular instance. This sufferer 
 was the Prophet Jeremiah. He does not name him, it is true, and it is evident that he has in 
 his eye, not the person of the prophet merely, but rather the servant of the Lord as a represen- 
 tative of the l^lapaiil nvevfiaTiKhq) spirituallsrael, yet all the particular features of this Lamenta- 
 tion are borrowed from the history of that prophet (vers. 1-18). This section ends with a cry of 
 despair (ver. 18). But immediately the poet lets a morning twilight, as it were, succeed this night 
 of despair, (vers. 19 21), which through the utterances of united believing Israel soon expands into 
 daylight, beaming with the most radiant consolation (vers. 22-38). In what follows successively, 
 the evening twilight gathers, and then the poem sweeps back into such a night ot grief and 
 mourning, tiiat Israel begins to confess his sins (vers. 39-42), but then gives vent to lamenta- 
 tions on account of those sins (vers. 43-47), until finally, m the last and third part, Jeremiah 
 again takes up the word in order to weep out his grief over Zion's misery and sins, (those sins 
 which were likewise the source of his own misfortunes), and to implore the Lord, in beseeching 
 prayer, for protection and for righteous avengement upon his enemies (vers. 48-66). In Song 
 IV., the poem loses more and more of its ideal character. In the beginning indeed we find an ideal 
 and well sustained description of Israel, as if it were the nobility of the nations, and then, fur- 
 ther, of the princes of Israel, as the noblest among the noble, and then, appearing in sharper re- 
 lief by standing out on such a back-ground, a delineation of the sufferings endured by those no- 
 bles (vers. 1-11) ; but in the second half of the chapter the poem becomes more prosaic : the chief 
 guilt is imputed to the prophets and the priests, whose well-deserved punishment is then por- 
 trayed in the gloomiest colors (vers. 12-16). Then follows a description, graphic in the highest 
 degree in spite of its brevity, of the events occurring from the extinction of the last gleams of 
 the rays of hope kindled by the Egyptians, till the imprisonment of the king (vers. 17-20). The 
 conclusion is a short address to Edom, which is ironically congratulated at the downfall of Je- 
 rusalem, while, at the same time, the punishment of its malicious joy is foretold (vers. 21, 22). 
 In Song v., the style is almost entirely prosaic. For, with the exception of ver. 16 a, no poeti- 
 cal expression is found in the whole chapter, rather only a concrete graphic picture of the naked 
 
 Tented by a thorough reformation, but which his partial reformation delayed for a brief time, only to make it the more tremen- 
 dous when it did come. Therefore, if we assume that the Lamentations are the elegy which Jeremiah wrote on the death of Jo- 
 siah, and especially if we assume that Jeremiah foresaw the inefficiency of Josiab's policy (see Stanley's Jewish Churcfi),it 
 would not seem strange that an elegy, written by Jeremiah, the prophet of the destruction, should be a prophecy of the destruo 
 tion of the city, which now, on account of Josiab's death, was hastening all the more rapidly to its fearful conclusion. Nor is it 
 in itself incredible, that the future should be presented in vision to God's prophet as distinctly as a picture of the historic 
 past. While we accept Isaiah xl.-lxvi. as the production of the prophet who wrote the earlier portions of that book, we 
 would speak only with respect of the opinion of those who see in the Lamentations a descriptive prediction of what was to 
 come to pass, while we reject the opinion itself as, on the whole, untenable. — W. H. H.] 
 
 * fOur author uses Zirni in the widest generic sense. Where the sense seems to require it, without changing his word, 
 which would sometimes involve a change in his view of the meaning of the text, the distinguishing name is inserted iq 
 brackets, as above. — W. H. H.l 
 
INTRODUCTION TO THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 reality. The alphabetical acrostic is entirely wanting in this chapter. The whole chapter is in 
 tended as a prayer; for it begins and ends with words of petition (vers. 1, 19-22). What lieg 
 between is only a narration of the principal afflictions, which had befallen those who had been 
 carried to Babylon and those who had fled to exile in Egypt (vers. 2-18). The concluding 
 prayer expresses the hope that the Lord, who cannot Himself change, nor altogether reject His 
 people, will bring them back again to Himself and to their ancient splendor (vers 19-22). 
 
 2. As regards its external structure, the composition of this book, both as a whole and in its 
 several parts, is so artistic, that anything like it can hardly be found in any other book of Holy 
 Scripture. First of all it is significant, that there &r% five Songs. For the uneven number has 
 this advantage, that the middle part of the whole Poem is represented by a whole number, and 
 does not fall between two numbers, as it would in case there were an even number of songs \i. e., 
 the middle part of the whole poem is represented by one Song, and is not composed of parts of 
 two songs]. By this means the prominence of the middle Song and, in connection with that, 
 an ascent and a descent, a crescendo and decrescendo movement, with a clearly marked climax, 
 is made possible. Thus it is manifest that the third chapter constitutes the climax. And thi» 
 is truly and really so in two respects, both as to matter and form. As to the first, we have al- 
 ready shown that the first two chapters bear an ideal and highly poetical character. They con- 
 stitute only the front-steps to the third chapter, which, externally, as the middle of the five 
 songs and by its internal character, conducts us into the very middle of the night into which 
 Israel sank, and then of the day which rose over Israel. For are not the frightful sorrows which 
 the Prophet Jeremiah, the servant of God and representative of the spiritual Israel, had endured, 
 and which rose at last to that terrible exclamation — My strength and my hope is •perished from- 
 Jehovah (iii. 18), the expressions of the highest outward and inward temptation which can befall 
 a true servant of the Lord? Here it should be observed that in iii. 1-17, there is no reference 
 to God except as the author of those sorrows which are represented, on that account, as Div^ine 
 temptations ; while the name of God is not even mentioned till at the end of ver. 18, where, as the 
 last word, with startling vehemence, the name "Jehovah" is pronounced. Here then we see 
 the servant of the Lord, in the deepest night of his misery, on the brink of despair. But where 
 exigency is greatest, help is nearest. The poet could lay up in his heart everything that he had 
 against God, but he could not shut God Himself out of his heart. On the contrary it was 
 proved, that, after he had given the fullest expression to what he had in his heart against God, 
 God Himself was deeply rooted therein. The night is succeeded by the dawn of morning, as 
 represented in vers. 19-21, With ver. 22, breaks the full day. This usher.-? in with full efi'ul- 
 gence the light of Heavenly consolation. Suffering now is seen to be the proof of God's love. 
 In this love, that suffering finds its explanation, its limit, and its remedy. As the pyramid of 
 Mont Blanc, seen at sunset from Chamouny, its summit gleaming with supernal splendors, 
 whilst below, the mountain has already disappeared wrapped in deepest darkness (See Gothe's 
 Letters from Switzerland, Nov. 4, 1779; Aug. 12, 18-10), so, out of the profound night of despair 
 and misery, this middle part of the third song and of the whole book towers upward, radiant 
 with light. From this culmination point, the poet again sets out upon his downward track. 
 Evening twilight follows the bright day (vers. 40-42) and passes into a night dark with misery 
 (vers. 43-47). From the beginning of the section, so full of hope and encouragement (ver. 22), 
 the poet speaks in the plural number, as if he would make it most emphatically apparent, that 
 this was common property. He continues to speak in the plural number till after the beginning 
 of the third and last part of the Song, when the night has begun again. Then once more (ver. 
 48), the poet speaks in the singular number. But he no longer speaks of those highest tempta- 
 tions, which were the subject of vers. 1-18, but of those inferior ones, which men indict upon us. 
 He treats of them also much more briefly ; and from ver. 55 to the end of the chapter, finds re- 
 lief in a prayer for help and avengement. — It is evident that this chapter consists of three parts. 
 The first part includes vers. 1-21; the second, vers. 22-42; the third, vers. 43-66. The second 
 part represents the culmination point of the whole book. It constitutes the point of separation 
 between the crescendo and decrescendo movement. The latter continues in chapter fourth, in 
 which the ideal and poetical sensibly subside, until at last in chapter fifth the style changes into 
 plain prose. — With this artistic arrangement of the matter, the external form or structure cor- 
 
§ 2. CONTENTS AND STRUCTURE. 
 
 responds. Every one of the five Songs has 22 verses, according to the number of letters in the 
 Hebrew alphabet, only in the third Song every verse is divided into three members, hence it haa 
 66 (masoretic) verses. The first four Songs are acrostics. In the first two Songs the verses 
 consist of three distiches. It has been usual to recognize four distiches in i. 7 and ii. 9, but im- 
 properly : for there is no fixed measure for the length of each. member of the distich ; and there 
 are, therefore, in the places referred to, only three distiches, some lines of which are composed 
 of a greater number of syllables than the others have. The third chapter shows by its external 
 dress that it is the middle and climax of the whole. The three distiches of each verse (corres- 
 ponding to three Masoretic verses successively) begin with the same alphabetical letter. The 
 middle part, namely iii. 19-42, is still further distinguished, as the dome crowning the whole 
 building, as follows : (1), Every verse-triad constitutes a finished whole with respect to sense 
 [is one complete sentence], (2). In vers. 25-39, each distich begins with the same word, or 
 with a similar word (see Intr. to chap. iii.). (3). While in vers. 1-18, the name of God is men- 
 tioned only once, and then with peculiar emphasis at the end of ver. 18, m vers. 19-42 we read 
 the names of God repeatedly, and so arranged that in vers. 22, 24, 25, 26 we have n'in% in vers. 
 31, 36, 37 "J'lX alternating with jv'^j? in vers. 35, 38, in ver. 40 again T^^p] and at last in ver. 41 
 D]Dt:?3 7X. Observe here, particularly, that f/if occurs in the Lamentations only in the two places 
 named above, and 'J^f^ occurs only once, in the beginning of the decrescendo movement, ver. 58, 
 whilst in chapter first it is used three times, vers. 14, 15 (twice), and in chapter second seven 
 times, vers. 1, 2, 5, 7, 18, 19, 20. Chapter fourth is indeed an acrostic, but the decline of the 
 poetical afflatus is indicated externally by the verses being composed of only two distiches. The 
 solemn names of God ''J^X and jlwj; occur no more, on the other hand mn' occurs three times, 
 vers. 11, 16, 20. The fifth chapter indicates its relation to the four preceding ones only by the 
 number of verses (22). The acrostic dress entirely disappears. The style has become prose. 
 Yet the name of God nin^ is found three times in the words of prayer, vers. 1, 19, 21. 
 
 We have here only one other matter to remark upon, the question why in -chapters ii., iii. and 
 iv. 3 is placed before i?. This is usually explained as a copyist's mistake. In fact some Codd. in 
 Kennicott and De Rossi have these verses in their usual places. The Peschito also gives these 
 verses in their proper alphabetical order. The Septuagjnt places the letters in their proper order 
 in the margin, but leaves the verses themselves to follow each other in the order of the original. 
 But this supposition of an error of transcriber is refuted, (1) by the fact that it is repeated three 
 times, (2) by the impossibility of supposing that in chap. iii. three verses could have been trans- 
 posed by mistake, (3) by the interruption of the sense which would result in chapters iii. and iv. 
 [if the present order were changed]. If some Codd. and Versions have the letters in their right 
 order, this is evidence of revision and correction. Others (as RiEaLER) explain this irregularity 
 as merely arbitrary, others again (Bertholdt) as the result of forgetfulness on the part of the 
 author. Grotiuh holds the singular opinion that the order in chapters ii., iii., iv. may be that 
 of the Chaldaic alphabet, and therefore that Jeremiah in chap, i, "speaks as a Hebrew, in the fol- 
 lowing chapters as a subject of the Chaldeans," Thenius would explain the alphabetical differ- 
 ence by a diversity of authors, but the unity of the plan, already proved above, and the unity 
 ot the language used, which will be proved in § 3 (to which also belongs the threefold HD'N at 
 the beginning of chaps, ii., iii., iv.) contradict this most decidedly, Evstald is (even still in his 
 Second Edition, p. 326) of the opinion that the i^ in chapter i, " might have been transferred to 
 its own place by later hands." But this would be a manifest interruption of the connection : 
 for ver. 16 is directly connected in the closest manner with ver. 15 by \2 S^ therefore, [nSK-'7;r 
 for these things?], whilst ver. 18 [17?] begins a new thought. The liberty which the older 
 poets especially allowed themselves in pursuing the alphabetical order (see Ps. ix., x., xxv., 
 xxxvii., cxlv., and Keil in Haevernick's Introduction to Old Testament, III., p. 50) are mani- 
 lold [See Barnes' Introduction to lob, pp. 44, 45]. Whether they were influenced in this by a 
 then prevailing diversity of method in respect to the succession of the letters, is not yet by any 
 
INTRODUCTION TO THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 meana sufficiently ascertained, but is nevertheless the most likely explanation of that liberty. 
 See Delitzsch on Ps. cxlv., p. 769.* 
 
 § 3. AUTHOR AND TIME OF COMPOSITION. 
 
 1. That the Prophet Jeremiah was the author of this book, not only is an old tradition, but 
 has been maintained by the majority of commentators up to the present time. Yet there is no 
 canonical [Scriptural ?] testimony for it. For neither in the later books of the Old Testament, 
 nor in the New Testament, is Jeremiah ever named as the author of Lamentations. There is 
 not in the above named parts of the Holy Scriptures a single quotation from the Lamentations. 
 The passage in James i. 12, which is appealed to, has only a very general resemblance to Lam. 
 iii. 26 ; and as regards Zech. i. 6, the expression DOT IKfXD n'ln; Hu'^ [Jehovah hath done like 
 as He purposed] is not specific enough, and if it is a quotation could refer to Jer. li. 12, as well 
 as to Lam. ii. 17. But the Alexandrian translation has preceding i. 1, these words, Kai kyivero /lera 
 TO aJ^waAoiriciJ^vai tov 'Icjpaf/Ti Kal 'lepovaaTifju. kprffiu^r/vac, ind'&Laev 'lepefiiag K?^aiuv Koi k'&pT/i'T/aE rov 
 ■&p7jvov ToiiTov £ttI 'IspovaaXfjfj. Kal elne. ["And it came to pass, after Israel had been carried away 
 captive, and Jerusalem was become desolate, that Jeremiah sat weeping, and lamented with this 
 lamentation over Jerusalem, and said."] The Vulgate also has these words, except that in place 
 of the simple Kal eItte [and he said], it has the words, et amaro animo suspirans et ejulans dixit 
 [" and with a sorrowful mind, sighing and moaning, he said " (Douay)]. The Arabic gives ex- 
 actly the words of the Septuagint. The Targum Jonathan begins with the words, Dixit Jere- 
 mias propheta et sace7-dos magnus [Jeremiah the prophet and chief priest (? X3]1 i^Jn^!) said]. 
 Josephus in the Antiq. Jud. L., x. c. 5, § 1, after he has spoken of the death and burial of King 
 
 Josiah, says, 'lepEfiia^ d' 6 'KpO(j)ijTJ]Q kniKrjSEiov avrov cvvha^e iiHoq -dprfVTjTiKov, o Kal /UE^pi vrr (hauhec 
 [" and Jeremiah the prophet composed an elegy to lament him which is extant till this time 
 also" (Whiston's Jbs<?/»/m.s')].f Thenius is of the opinion that this asserts only the existence 
 of the elegy on the death of Josiah composed by Jeremiah, and has no reference at all to the 
 Lamentations. But I believe that Thenius here is in error. For the words of Josephus can- 
 not be translated the [solenne) elegy on Josiah, because in that case it must have been called to 
 i-uiKijfiuov avTov [the elegy on him]. We can only translate thus, — Jeremiah composed as an elegy 
 on him a lamentation song, which is still extant. To call it to kniKtidEiov {the elegy) would im- 
 ply that the poem then existing really belonged to the species ''elegy," that is to say, it possessed 
 all the peculiarities of such a poem and was manifestly the solenne [elegy] on the deceased king 
 Josiah that the customs of the times demanded. J But the absence of the article marks the still 
 
 * rfi riRLAcn: Intr. pp. 9, 10: "The general remark 'that the Poet strictly confined himself to the external form, only so 
 long as tlie thought accommodated itself to it without artificiality ' (Keil, EM., S. 378 ; 6. Haevernick, III. 58), does not 
 
 6u£9ce, for the evident ease with which the Poet elsewhere manages tne Form, [shows] that another arrangement 
 
 of the alphabet would have had no diflBculties for him. And how little the observations which Neumann {S. 490, 508) makes 
 in the way of explanation, contain an explanation in reality, may be shown by his remark on ii. 16, where lie says, ' Let us 
 only reflect on the difference between N3 mouth, and VV ej/e, and we Jiere at least compreliend the transposition, where the 
 
 mouth is tlie exulting mouth of God's enemies, the eye — God's watchful eye over the life of His people.' That could only 
 be the real meaning if the following y-yerse treated of God's eye watching for the protection of His people ; on the very 
 contrary, it does treat of tlie execution of punishment. But in view of the unsuccessful results of the special and repeated 
 attempts to throw light on the darkness of this anomaly, the author must close this part of his preliminary discussion with 
 a non liqueiy] 
 
 •f- [The literal translation is, " Jeremiah the prophet composed an elegy on him, a lamentation song, which is extant now." 
 The words "a lamentation song," so obviously superfluous, suggest the question, whetiier the wjrd.s ;cxi avt'dra^e, or words 
 of similar import, may not once have preceded /ae'Ao; 9privr]TiKbi', and been dropped out on a presumption of error by those who 
 took for granted that all Jeremiali wrote still survived ? This would suit what immediately follows, which consists of an 
 account of Jeremiah's writings. — W. II. II.] 
 
 :J: [Thenius : Josephus " only said, that Jeremiah had composed the (solenne) elegy [funeral-poem] on Josiah, and that this 
 was still extant in his (Josephus') time ; how and where, whether in writing or in the mouth of the people [by oral tradi- 
 tion] he does not say, and least of all does he say that he finds that particular dirge (the singular number sli'.uld not be un- 
 observed) in the HDX [Book of Lamentations] ; had he believed this, since he adhered almost exclusively to Cn- \ i !■.] ... u,' 
 
 r • *" 
 the LXX., he would have surely added to Sia/xevei [is extant] the words iv toi? Sp^roi? [in the Lamentations]." The 
 strongest point in this argument is, not the interpolation of the definite article, to wiiich Dr. N.^EGELsn.icn justly takes ex- 
 ception, but the fact that Josephus not only fails to say that this dirge is extant in the Book of Lamentations, but speaks of 
 it only in the singular number its "a song of lamentation " (fifAo? OpitvrjTiKoi'). Wo can account for this onlj', by supposing 
 that he regarded the five songs as essentially one, and that having already characterized it as a lamentation song, he could 
 
§ 3. AUTHOR AND TIME OF COMPOSITION. 
 
 extant uD^q ■QprjvriTiKbv [song of lamentation] as not necessarily belonging to the species " elegy," 
 but only as a hemq [song] which had served as an elegy. This admirably suits the Lamenta- 
 tions, which indeed contain not a single syllable referring to a dead king. Add to this, that 
 Josephus in the same chapter, after he had related the death and burial of Josiah, seizes the op- 
 portunity to give a short notice of the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel, and of their writings. 
 For after the words quoted, he proceeds thus, "This prophet also predicted, and left [those pre- 
 dictions] in writing, the calamity that was coming upon the city, and truly as well that destruc- 
 tion which has in our days come upon us, as the Babylonish captivity. But not only he fore- 
 told such things, but the prophet Ezekiel, who first wrote and left behind him two books con- 
 cerning these things." However we understand the somewhat obscure words concerning the 
 writings of Ezekiel, this much at least is evident, that Josephus intends- to give here a brief 
 notice of the writings of the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel. And so he says, Jeremiah has left 
 behind him two writings, a lamentation song and prophecies, Ezekiel has likewise left behind 
 him prophecies, and truly in two books. Thenius says, if Josephus had meant our Lamenta- 
 tions by that ntloq ^prjVTjTLiibv [lamentation song], then he would have written iv rote, ^pipoLq [in 
 the Lamentations]. But I maintain on the contrary, that if Josephus meant the Sprivoi [Lamen- 
 tations] by the /^f/^. i?/)^. [lamentation song], the addition ev role -dprpioig [in the Lamentations] was 
 not necessary [see note, p. 6.— W. H. H.], but if he intended to say what Thenius makes him 
 say, then he would have written ovk h rolg T^pf/voic [not in the Lamentations]. For since Jose- 
 phus in this place speaks, not only of the elegy on Josiah's death, but likewise of the writings 
 of Jeremiah generally, and since in his times our Lamentations were already regarded as a writing 
 of Jeremiah's, as we know by the superscription of the Septuagint, he should, not to be en- 
 tirely unintelligible, expressly declare that he did not mean by this iidloQ ^pr/vrjrmbv [lamentation 
 song] which Jeremiah had composed on the death of Josiah, the ■dprjvoi [Book of Lamentations]. 
 Since he has not done this, every one who knows that there are two writings in the canon which 
 are referred back to Jeremiah as their author, must understand the words of Josephus as in- 
 tended to designate those two writings extant in the canon. According to this, therefore, Jose- 
 sephus regarded Jeremiah as the author of the Lamentations, in which he, as Jerome did (Com- 
 ment., Zech. vii. 11), recognized the elegy on Josiah mentioned in 2 Chron. xxxv. 25-. Among the 
 moderns, Usher, J. D. Michaelis (on Low^th de sacr. poes. Hebr. Not. 97, pp. 445 sqq.), and 
 Dathe {prophetce maj., ed. 1) shared this opinion, but both the latter receded from it (see iV. 
 Or. Bibl. I., 106, and Dathe ^rqp^. maj., ed. 2). The Talmud also regards Jeremiah as the 
 author of Lamentations [Baba batr., Fol. 15, Col. 1), Jeremias scripsit librum smim et librum 
 regum et threnos [Jeremiah wrote his own book and the book of Kings and the Lamentations]. 
 This is the opinion also of the church fathers, all of them, (see Origen in Euseb. hist, ecd., Jv. 
 25, Jerome in Prolog, galeat., and on Zech. xii. 11) and of later theologians. The learneu and 
 whimsical Herman von der Haardt, in a Programme in which he announced a commentary 
 on Lamentations {Helmstddt, 1712), was the first to deny the authorship of Jeremiah ascribing 
 the book to Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, Abednego, and the king Joachin, assuming thai each 
 one of them had written one chapter. Later, the unknown author of an Essay in the Tubingen 
 Theol. Quart., 1819, Part 1, — afterwards, though only in the way of conjecture, Augusti, in his 
 Intr. to the Old Test. Scrip., p, 227,— and again Conz in Bengel's Archiv, IV. pp. 161, 162, 
 422 sqq., — express themselves as against the authorship of Jeremiah. Kalkar also in his com- 
 mentary [Hafnix, 1836) thinks it suspicious that the Book so long retained its place among the 
 Hagiographa and that the Greek version of it diflfers so much from that of the prophetical book, 
 although he will not allow that those circumstances are decisive, as in fact they are not. 
 Ewald, who in the first edition of the Poetical Books of the Old Testament (1839, V. 1, pp. 
 139 flf.) in no way impugned the traditional opinion, has since (Gesch. Isr. IV. S. 22 flf. ; see 
 Jahrb. fur bibl, Wissenschaft, VII. S. 151; Foet. Biicher, 2te. Aufl. 1. I'h. 2te. ffd^fte., p. 
 321 S.) expressed his opinion to this effect, that 'Jeremiah's authorship, with nothing to prove 
 it, may be regarded as impossible on the ground of the language alone.' He believes that the 
 
 not add that this Song was found (iv rois flpiji/oi?) in the Snngs of Lamentation, without seeming to specify onr jit^ie Son.a 
 of the five a.s separately and particularly intended. Thexiis in his ijuotation of Josephus omits the won O/hivjiti-koi 
 (IGtIi i;d., Leipzig, l8o5, p. 116), and geems to have wholly overlooked it.— W. U. H.l 
 
8 INTRODUCTION TO THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 author was probably one of Jeremiah's disciples, " Baruch or some other." Bunsen also [before 
 Ewald] ascribes the authorship to Baruch [Gott in der Oeschichte, I. iS'. 426). Thenius an- 
 nounces the opinion in his commentary (lOie. Lief, des kurzgef. exeg. Hdb. z. A. T., 1855, § 3 
 der Vorheynm., S. 117,] that chapters ii. and iv. are indeed by Jeremiah, but the other parts pro- 
 ceeded from other authors. He combats the argument drawn from tradition, and whilst he in- 
 fers from the difference between the proeraium of the Septuagint and that of the Vulgate, that 
 there was a Hebrew original, he also infers from the absence of the same in the Hebrew Codd. that 
 the Jews doubted its genuineness, and thus he accounts for the transposition of the Lamenta- 
 tions to the Ketubim [or Hagiographa]. He contends further, that the traditional opmion is not 
 confirmed by the subject-matter, spirit-tone and language, or by the character of unity in the 
 Book itself.* He finds it highly unlikely that Jeremiah should have treated of the same sub- 
 ject j?i'e times.-\ He says further, "It requires only a very ordinary degree of aesthetical sensi- 
 bility to distinguish the difference between Odes ii.,iv., which are really fine, unconstrainedly 
 animated, methodical and natural in arrangement and succession of ideas, and remarkable for 
 their simplicity, and the dissimilar and weaker Songs, i., iii., which, whatever excellence they 
 have in other respects, are hampered with the external form, in many ways artificial, here and 
 there heaping up images and confusing them together and losing themselves in reminiscences of 
 the past." To this he adds, that i., iii., v., among other things, record circumstances in which 
 Jeremiah had no part. Finally the fact, that in ii., iv., the verses beginning with 3 precede 
 those beginning with ^ is only explicable by assuming a diversity of authors. Agreeably to 
 these sentiments, Thenius ascribed chapters ii., iv., to Jeremiah, as already remarked, but is of 
 the opinion that chapter i. was composed " some time after the destruction of Jerusalem, by one 
 who had remained in the land, and who at least was acquainted with chap. ii. ;" and that chap, 
 iii. was composed, also by one remaining in the land, shortly before the last deportation. He 
 regards Song V., finally, as "the entirely disconnected poetry of a man there [in the land] who 
 was probably a leader of a crowd of nobles, who having refused to join the expedition to Egypt, 
 wandered about everywhere seeking a safer place of refuge."J These arguments of Thenius 
 have no matter-of-fact foundation, and cannot therefore be convincing. 
 
 As for me, formerly I was so convinced that Jeremiah was the author, as to declare this con- 
 viction in the article " Lamentations of Jeremiah," in Herzog's Real Encyclopaedia, and even 
 in various places in my exposition of Jeremiah. But my conviction has been shaken on more 
 accurate examination by the following matters of fact. 1. The tradition originates from the 
 testimony of the Alexandrian translation. But on what does this testimony itself rest ? We 
 are compelled to ask this question, for the authority of that translation is by itself an entirely 
 insufficient foundation. It is possible that the Alexandrian translator had predecessors in his 
 opinion. But no evidence of that nature has come to us.^ It is further possible that he, or his 
 
 * [Oerlach : " The grounds of Ewald's opinions [as to the authorship] are only philological , but how venturesome it is 
 to attempt to decide on such grounds alone, is shown by a comparison between Thenius and Ewald ; the former of whom, 
 on philological grounds— those very grounds the perception of which may belong only to "■ an xsthttical sensibility thoroughly 
 practised' — imputes chapters i., iii., v. to another author than the author of chapters ii. and iv., which he leaves to Jere- 
 miah; whilst Ewald, and truly in our opinion with entire correctness, remarks, that 'all these five songs, in the structure 
 of their language, and in their rhetorical and poetical characteristics, as well as in thought and doctrine, and also in their 
 historical allusions and descriptions, have a similarity so complete, that every competent judge will ascribe them to only one 
 Poet.' {Bibl. Jahrh., VII. S. 151. Comp. Didder d. A. B., 3d Aufl., S. 325 f.)."J 
 
 t[GERLACH: "Against the authorship of all five Songs by Jeremiah, Thenius again raises a general objection in the ques- 
 tion whether it were probable that Jeremiah had treated one and the same subject five times. But if, according to his 
 own declaration, the treatment of the same subject twice over has 'nothing strange in it considering the extraordinary 
 character of the event lamented,'— then this objection to the five Songs appears all the more trivial when it is found on ex- 
 amination, that each Song treats of the common subject from a different point of view. * * * But this objection is entirely 
 destroyed by the acknowledgment, arrived at from most different stand-points, of the ' internal, organic connection ' (Keil) 
 of all five Songs, of which statement Ewald especially has made great use (BiU. Jahrh., VII. S. 152; Gutt. gel. Anz., 1863, S 
 <^34 f. ; THehterdes A. B , 3d Aufl.. .ST. 3i?)." Gkrlach adds in anote, that with the proof of this " internal, organic connec- 
 tion " between the five Songs, the various attempts to assign the composition of the Songs to different times, or to bring them 
 into different arrangements, must fall to the ground.— W. H. H.] 
 
 X [Gerlach, with reference to Thenius' theory concerning Song V., says, " It is difficult seriously to discuss the possibility 
 of such conjectures in order to prove them: Thenius has not even attempted the proof and has thus spared those who come 
 after him the trouble of refutation."] 
 
 J [The evidence may not be satisfactory to Dr. Naeqelsbach, but ho should not say so absolutely that there is "no evi. 
 
5 3. AUTHOR AND TIME OF COMPOSITION. 
 
 predecessors, or both, derived that opinion from the book itself. For it is easy to suppose that 
 the prophet, who had himself lived to see Jerusalem's fall, should write upon it an appropriate 
 dirge. This was more likely to be supposed since this prophet had formerly been acknowledged 
 as a composer of dirges (2 Chron. xxxv. 25). Moreover, how could a tearful song over Jerusa- 
 lem's downfall fail to be expected from that prophet who had said, " Oh, that my head were 
 waters, and mine eye a fountain of tears, that I might weep day and night for the slain of the 
 daughter of my people I" (viii. 23). Add to this, that in chapter iii. the poet seems to identify 
 himself with the prophet, and that the undeniably obvious and sympathetic harmony with the 
 prophetical writings of Jeremiah seems to confirm that identity. The probability, therefore, 
 that Jeremiah may have written a book of this description, cannot be denied. But how stands 
 it with the evidence which the book itself, in ch. iii., seems to give in regard to its author, and 
 how with the harmony in the way of thought and language ? As for the internal evidence of 
 ch. iii., in the first and third parts of that chapter the prophet Jeremiah certainly speaks. But 
 the question occurs, whether he speaks as the author, or whether the author makes him speak ? 
 Either is in itself possible. For since the author in i. 11 makes the personified Zion speak, he 
 may likewise in ch. iii. make the prophet Jeremiah, as the representative of the 'lapaeX nvEv/xa- 
 TMog [the spiritual Israel], speak. But, on the other hand, since in ch. ii. the author is the 
 speaker and there speaks of himself in vers. 11, 13, so in iii. 1-28, 48-66, the author may be 
 the speaker, and according to the purport of the contents, he is speaking of himself. But here 
 two things are to be taken into account. The first is this, that ch. iii. (see the exposition) con- 
 stitutes the middle and climax of the whole book. Here the artistic construction reaches ita 
 highest pinnacle, and the prophet speaking in the first and last of the three parts, forms with 
 hi3 mournful lamentations the background for the bright and consolatory section contained in 
 vers. 22-42. Is it now likely that Jeremiah would thus have made his own person the middle- 
 point of the poem and would have done this with so much art?* To me this seems not likely, 
 even though it is assumed that the prophet speaks here in the name of the whole Jehovah-faith- 
 ful Israel. Jeremiah, who was so modest and humble, would at the most have let his personal 
 sufi'erings appear, if at all, only as an element or constituent part of the sufiering which the 
 faithful Israel had to sufi"er in common. But it does not seem like him thus to place his own 
 person in the foreground as he does in that section which begins with " I am the man," iii. 1. 
 In regard to the artistic construction, I have already in the Introduction to his Prophecies (§ 3), 
 confessed that Jeremiah's style is not deficient in art. See for example his second discourse, 
 chs. iii.-vi. But this refinement of art, this acrostic, this adroit periodic versification, these in- 
 genious transitions in iii. 19-21, 39-42, this crescendo and decrescendo movement resting upon 
 
 dence." The bare fact of the existence of the words referred to in the Septuagint, a translation on the whole so faithful, 
 and made by Jews who almost superstitiously venerated the written word and scrupulously adhered to Hebrew originals, 
 is some evidence, constituting a probability at least, that the Septuagint copied these words from Hebrew MSS. Then again 
 the grammatical structure of the sentence suits the assumption that it is a translation of a Hebrew original. The general 
 agreement of the Vulgate with the Septuagint and yet the difference between the two, Mfould indicate that the Vulgate is 
 not a mere copy of the Septuagint, but obtained the words from an independent source. Even Thenius is satisfied with the 
 evidence that these words must have had a Hebrew original, and feels it incumbent upon him to explain why they are not 
 found in our existing Hebrew Bibles. Gerlach : " Whether the Vulgate derived that introduction from the LXX., the [addi- 
 tional] words being added or having fallen out of the text of the LXX. [since the Vulgate was written], or whether both, inde- 
 pendently of each other, reproduced a note found in their manuscripts, is of no importance, since the grammatical construc- 
 tion of the words in either case refers to a Hebrew original, which preceded both. In this, to be presumed Hebrew original, 
 we have to recognize the oldest tradition concerning the author. But that this [superscription] was not accepted by the editors 
 of our received text, cannot be explained with Thenius by the assumption, 'that it was not regarded as satisfactory, that 
 those editors were doubtful at least whether Jeremiah had composed th& first song, — for that immediately follows after 
 «ol 61776 [and he said].' Since this superscription could have no other object than to connect the Lamentations with a pre- 
 ceding writing (see the ko-'l iyivero k. t. A. [and it came to pass, etc.]), and that writing could only be the prophecies of Jere- 
 miah, after which a part of the Jews placed them, then the absence of the superscription in those manuscripts which place 
 the Lamentations among the Hagiographa, is self-explained and nothing less than proper." — W. H. H.] 
 
 * [Had he done so he would have violated no rule of good taste or propriety. He could, moreover, without charge or 
 egotism, direct attention to himself, because he was the prophet of .Tehovah and the representative of pious Israel and in 
 his sufferings a representative of the Prophet of all prophets and the Head of Israel. But, in fact, there is not a word ia 
 the whole chapter, that any good man might not have writteuof himself without a breach of humility, and in "the brightly- 
 shining comfort-section " (vers. 22-42) Jeremiah hardly alludes to himself at all. That part is not in the first person, but in 
 the third person, and is not personal to the prophet, but passes beautifully and modestly into general truths of universal 
 •pplicallon.— W. H. H.] 
 
10 INTRODUCTION TO THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 the five-fold division of the whole poem — truly all this seems not like Jeremiah. In his writings 
 nothing similar to this is found.* Would any one ascribe the most perfect product, in regard 
 to the external artistic structure, of the Old Testament Scriptures, to that same prophet whose 
 style is elsewhere characterized as sermo incultus el pasne subrusticus, if indeed one pauses to 
 recognize his style at all, and does not rather direct his attention to those rerum coeleslium mys- 
 teria which are concealed under the sacramenlis lilerarum ? Nevertheless, I freely grant that 
 neither the psychological, nor the rhetorical argument can, by itself alone, claim to be deci- 
 sive. 
 
 But another argument must be added to these, namely. Secondly, The prevailing character 
 of the language in the Lamentation^. This differs very considerably from that of the propheti 
 cal book. Although the author of Lamentations has much in common with that prophet, not 
 only in general as a Hebrew writer, but also in particular by a designed reference to the writings 
 of Jeremiah, yet on the other hand, he has so much that is peculiar to himself, and so much that 
 Jeremiah has not at all, or has only in a different form, that it is difficult to believe in the iden- 
 tity of the two. I have spared myself no trouble to compare every word of the Lamentations 
 (with the exception of such as are constantly recurring, as n^n, ty^X, etc., without which Hebrew 
 cannot be written) with the writings of Jeremiah. I have availed myself for this pur- 
 pose of the Concordance of Fuerst, and have found the same correct and to be depended 
 upon, with the exception of what is given in respect to the word 'J'lX. The following is the 
 result of this painfully laborious comparison, wherein I refer in every instance for authentica- 
 tion to the exposition of the passages in which the words occur. 
 
 [Note. The bearing of the argument to be derived from the verbal differences, between 
 
 the Prophecies of Jeremiah and tho Book of Lamentations, is critically examined in the Ap- 
 pendix to this Introduction. The writer of this note, unwilling to msert his dissent from the 
 very learned and conscientious author of this Introduction in the text of these pages, and un- 
 able to condense the reasons for his dissent in notes at the bottom of the pages, would here 
 refer the reader to the Appendix, for a general summary of arguments in confirmation of the 
 opinion that Jeremiah was the author of the Lamentations.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Chapter I. Ver. 1. The phrases Dj; "^1^ and D;U5 n occur only here. The singular 
 mt^ as an appellative, only here. nr"]p is not foreign to Jeremiah's times, but is never used 
 bv him DdS HD'H, never in Jeremiah.— Ver. 2. 'n*? never in Jeremiah. DHjp J'N, only in 
 
 -/ * - T T : It' 
 
 this chapter, vers. 2, 9, 16, 17, 21, and in Eccles. iv. 1 (although the Piel of the verb Onj occurs 
 in Jer. xvi. 7 ; xxxi. 13). — Ver. 3. ^)V. five times in Lamentations. Jeremiah uses neither 
 it nor the root HJ;?. See iii. 33 : v. 11. For 3*1? Jeremiah says 31 hv_ or 313. Hli^, niJD 
 (Jeremiah says nniJD), U"}V^, never in Jeremiah.— Ver. 4. '73N never in Jeremiah, "^^^p, which 
 occurs in Lamentations six times, and always in the sense of a time or place of a festival, is 
 found twice in Jeremiah, but both times in the general sense of tempus fixum. The expres- 
 sions -"S '»<3. Opi'lJ' (see vers. 13, 16 ; iii. 11), the termination j""— the verbs HJN (see vers. 8, 11) 
 and r\y (four times in Lamentations) never in Jeremiah.— Ver. 5. 1312^ '^r\ is peculiar to this 
 place. The sing. "<V, which occurs five times in Lamentations, is never in Jeremiah. He uses 
 only the plural.— Ver. 6. ]0 xr for formken only here. "inn. Vn (masc), r\}^pp (Jeremiah 
 always n';r"i5) never with Jeremiah. «]P Jeremiah uses only with suffixes.— Ver. 7. D"}nD, 
 only here, iii. 19, and Is. Iviii. 7. ibnp (see vers. 10, 11 ; ii. 4) never in Jeremiah. He uses 
 
 * [Shall we doubt whether Shakspeare wrote Tarqiiin and Lucrece, and Venus and Adonis, because in all his plays there 
 is nothing similar to the very artificial construction of these Spenserian poems ? Can we expect the same style, the mani- 
 festations of precisely the same qualities of genius in a formal stately poom, like those meutioned, and in the free unem- 
 l-arrassed composition of tho stage play? Shall we expect to find no new traits of genius and evidences of versatility of 
 tal.-nt, when the orator-prophet, who has electrified Israel by his impromptu bursts of eloquence, called forth by passing 
 events and pressing emergencies, sits down to the careful composition of a lyrical dirge, to be constructed in accordance with 
 pre-determined artistic rules? It is possible that one might r,-ad Tarquin and Lucrece, and say that its author was incapa. 
 We of writing Shakspeare's plays. Another might read the prophecies of Jeremiah and say, their author was ino»pabU 
 Of producing the Lamentations. Both would be mistoken.— W. H. H.] 
 
g 3. AUTHOR AND TIME OF COMPOSITION. H 
 
 only •npn. r\3tyD an. "key. — Ver. 8. N£?n (see iii. 39) never in Jeremiah. He uses only nxtsn. 
 riTJ, 1330, v'Tn (only here), Hl^j; never in Jeremiah. Hnx (see ver. 13) occurs in Jeremiah 
 only with "^/n or JIDJ — Ver. 9. HKOp D'XTi) never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 10. lOHD never in Jere- 
 
 J '-T T t:-. '-t: t:- 
 
 miah (see ver. 7).— Ver. 11. njX (see ver. 4), nbno (see ver. 7), ^3«, K^SJ yvJr\, 1333 (see vtr. 
 12; iii. 63; iv. 16; v. 1), never in Jeremiah.— Ver. 12. '}'}'}_ '■?3ir (see ii. 15), 'liJN jnn DV (is. 
 xiii. 13) never in Jeremiah. See ii. 1. /Vl;? (see ver. 22; ii. 20; iii. 51) Jeremiah uses only 
 once in the sense oiracemari. Once also in Hithp. xxxviii. 19. — Ver. 13. ■H^?.- nn (see v. 17) 
 never in Jer. — Ver. 14. Ipty an. ley. J^i^ETl Hithp. only here. 'J^X in Jeremiah never alone, 
 but always joined with mil' ; in Lamentations fourteen times, and always alone. — Ver. 15. 
 hSd, njt^'lD N'lp, na never in Jeremiah. ■'37 ^4 =11"^ only here. — Ver. 16. n''3'3 only here. DHJ? 
 see ver. 2. "t^iiJ ^TP, see ver. 11. D'ppw, see ver. 4. — Ver. 17. DnJO px, see ver. 2. HIJ 
 (see ver. 8) never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 18. Hi) rr^O never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 19. 713"*, Piel, J^U 
 never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 20. "^If, see ver. 5. "^P^on (see ii. 11), ""S^ '^SpA never in Jeremiah. — 
 Ver. 21. nJNJ, see ver. 4. onjD, see ver. 2.— Ver. 22. •'3 'JsS n;rn nx3, nnjK never in 
 Jeremiah. 
 
 Chapter II. Ver. 1. 3''j;^ an. ley. D'nn, f]N DV (see i. 12 ; ii. 21, 22) never in Jeremiah.— 
 Ver. 2. i^Z^, Piel, never in Jeremiah, in this chapter five times. Instead of /On i<i (see ver. 
 17) Jeremiah says DHp X'?. 3p^' niNJ only here. — Ver. 3. Jeremiah uses only the Niphal of 
 J^IJ. '^X '7? never in Jeremiah, linx 3"'E'n, see i. 8. ytp\ Jeremiah uses only once, and then 
 not in a figurative sense. Jeremiah never says SOD 73X, he uses in this connection always 
 D^T3p or nn^pp — Ver. 4. 3X: Niph. never in Jeremiah, nonp, see i. 7, 10, 11. {i'2f. n3_ Snx 
 only here.— Ver. 5. J^bp]., see ver. 2. n^:xi ^l^.^.^ from Is. xxix. 2.— Ver. 6. I^ID, see i. 4. n|l7 
 Piel only here. ^132? in Jeremiah only in the passage xvii. 21-27. — Ver. 7. HJT never in Jere- 
 miah ; in Lamentations three times, ii. 7 ; iii. 17, 31. 'J^X see i. 14. "^XJ in no form in Jere- 
 miah. "'"Jpr', Hiph. never in Jeremiah, he once only uses the Pual (xiii. 19). — Ver. 8. J^v3, 
 see ver. 2. Jeremiah does not use the Hiph. of /3X. 7n never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 10. "^SJ^ 
 
 Sr -T •■ XT 
 
 never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 11. Hi^'DT never in Jeremiah ; he uses only Hl'm. "1D"lDn see i. 20. 
 "133, liver, never in Jeremiah. '\0]l (three times in Lamentations and only in ch. ii., namely, 
 vers. 11, 12, 19) never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 12. '^PJ?^'?, see ver. 11. Hithp. "^QPipT] never in 
 Jeremiah. — Ver. 13. rioi Piel, T]W and 07^^"^' ^3 (the last in Lamentations again ver. 15) 
 never in Jeremiah. Jeremiah never constructs Xi3"l with 7. — Ver. 14. Jeremiah never uses the 
 verb nin alone, nor Xlty nin. The latter is an expression occurring in Ezekiel. Also /On, for 
 which Jeremiah says nSpn (xxiii. 13). — Jeremiah never uses nbj with 7^ (see again iv. 22). 
 n'lXJJ/p (chosen with reference to Jer. xxiii. 33-40) only here. Jeremiah uses Xlt:' only in the 
 formula XlU^j. DTinp (probably framed with reference to Jer. xxvii. 10, 15) is an. ley — Ver. 
 15. Jeremiah never says D'33 p3D, nor ■^^T '^pj; (see i. 12), nor K'XI "STIT), For the last Jere- 
 miah says lyxip TJll. piK^n' np, see ver. 13. The '^, relat., never in Jeremiah ; in Lamenta- 
 tions four times, ii. 15, 16 ; iv. 9 ; v. 18. 'p' ■f^!?"''?P is an expression of Ezekiel's (xxvii. 3 ; 
 xxviii. 12). >!^ is never found in Jeremiah. — Ver. 16. riV3 (see iii. 46), "^pT^ never in Jere- 
 miah. ;'^3, see ver. 2.— Ver. 17. .T'^S, Piel never in Jeremiah. He uses only J/Xp ^If^^. H^px, 
 an. Xey. /DPI X7l, see ver. 2. "]pp.once in Jeremiah, IP.p. D")n never. — Ver. 18. nj13 (see iii. 
 49) only here. J^- ^^ only elsewhere in Ps. xvii. 8.— Ver. 19. nnoK^X K^X"), sSjJBE^ D'3_3_Xtrj^ 
 ^1J3;; (see ver. 12) never in Jeremiah. niyin-S3 i:?X"i3 is found in Nah. iii. 10 ; Isa. Ii. 20 ; 
 in the Lamentations again iv. 1 ; in Jeremiah never. — Ver. 20. no'pn"! '"'■' nxp, see i. 11. 
 
2-2 INTRODUCTION TO THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 D'nata, drr. ?iey6fi.—Vev. 21. ^X DV, see vers. 22, 1. n^^n nS, see ver. 2.— Ver. 22. "^^p, see 
 i. 4. n3£3 only here. nS^, Piel never in Jeremiah. '" ^X Dl'', see ver. 1. 
 
 Chapter III. — Ver. 1. 'JI^ (see i. 3) never in Jeremiah. £3^2? only found in Jeremiah in the 
 critically suspicious places, x. 16 ; li. 19. ^ri^nj; OT^, from Prov. xxii. 8.— Ver. 2. iT\2, IjE/n, 
 never in Jeremiah. The sentence "'IX kS ijiZ'n from Am. v. 18, 20; Job xii. 25.— Ver. 4. 
 nSa, rimiSil, *l3i2^ (see Isa. xxxviii. 13), never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 5. '\'p_y nxSn never in Jere- 
 miah. K'X'i, poison, Jeremiah uses only in the phrase IS'X"! 'p, — Ver. 6. D'S'^no never in 
 Jeremiah. dVi>' 'JIO only elsewhere Ps. cxliii. 3 ; comp. Ps. Ixxxviii. 5-7. — Ver. 7. "^l^ (see 
 ver. 9), TS^n Hiph., never in Jeremiah. XVN xbl only elsewhere Ps. Ixxxviii. 9. ^y^r\^ never 
 in Jeremiah ; he uses only D^^E'nj. — Ver. 8. }^l^^ Orw (DnD) never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 9. "1^1 
 see ver. 7. ^"1^ H^i;? Piel, never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 10. 3'n never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 11. I^ID 
 as Pilel from I'D, or Poel from "1"]D, only here. r\UB is also a-, ley. DOViy, see i. 4.— Ver. 12. 
 Xlt30, in the sense of mark, never in Jeremiah.— Ver. 13. nstyx 'J3 only here. — Ver. 14. 
 nj'JJ never in Jeremiah, see ver. 63 ; v. 14. — Ver. 15. D'lno never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 16. 
 D"^!, V'^n never in Jeremiah. K'£33 ctt. ^ev — Ver. 17. njl never in Jeremiah, see ii. 7 ; Ps. 
 
 -tItt -t' -t 
 
 Ixxxviii. 15. — Ver. 18. nvj, in the sense here required, and ^(/n'lD never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 19. 
 ^iy, see i. 3. DH^ID, see i. 7. K'X'l, see ver. 5. — Ver. 20. T\W never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 21. 
 37-7X yVT), 1T\\ never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 22. D'lDn, plural, never in Jeremiah, see ver. 32. — 
 Ver. 23. D"''ip37 never in Jeremiah; he uses in this sense, once only, *^p3Z- — Ver. 24. "^^PX 
 ''ppi only here. IT}" never in Jeremiah, see ver. 21. — Ver. 25. nip, Kal never in Jeremiah ; he 
 uses only Piel and Niphal. — Ver. 26. /Tl'' only here. Di^n never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 27. 
 hj; Xi7J only here.— Ver. 28. ^7^3 never in Jeremiah.— Ver. 29. "ISJ^S HS \r\i only here. 13^. 
 alone, never in Jeremiah, see ii. 10. — Ver. 30. n^p Part., T}! (see i. 2), never in Jeremiah. — 
 Ver. 31. njf (see ver. 17; ii. 7), never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 32. nr (see ver. 17 ; i. 4, 5,12), 
 ^""l^tl. Plural (see ver. 22) never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 33. HJJ,', in this sense (see v. 11), as well 
 as its derivative ""JJ^,. nj' (see ver. 32), K^'X 'JS, never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 34. I'DX never in 
 Jeremiah. — Ver. 35. '•3 OSpD filDH |V7j;, as a name of God (see ver. 38), never in Jeremiah. 
 —Ver. 36. rii;^ (see ver. 59) never in Jeremiah. 'J^X, see i. 14.— Ver. 37. "Tl'-M "ion from Ps. 
 xxxiii. 9. "nx, see i. 14.— Ver. 38. y^Z see ver. 35.— Ver. 39. "j^X, N£pn (see i. 8) never in 
 Jeremiah. Jeremiah uses 'n only in oaths. — Ver. 40. K'Sn never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 41. XE^J 
 aaS (see ii. 19). D'DtJ'3 bx, never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 42. IJnj never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 43. pD 
 (see ver. 44) never in Jeremiah. J?7^n X7, see 11. 2, 17, 21.— Ver. 44. '^DD, see ver. 43.-— Ver. 
 45. TID and D'lXD, as substantives, only here ; Jeremiah expresses these ideas otherwise. 3^p3 
 never in Jeremiah without suf&x; he says ^'in3. — Ver. 46. See ii. 16. — Ver. 47. .nxi^n only 
 here. — Ver. 48. jhs never in Jeremiah.— Ver. 49. HJ^sn an. ley. See ii. IS.— Ver. 50. ^p_S2f 
 never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 51. nSVlj;, see i. 12. — Ver. 52. 1'l32f never in Jeremiah. D^n ""TX 
 only here. — Ver. 53. rip:^ never in Jeremiah — Ver. 54. '^'V- IH never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 55. 
 '" DK^ Nip, nrrinn, never in Jeremiah.— Ver. 56. d"^;?- nnn never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 57. 
 
 tIt • : - ' - T T T : 
 
 a^p. Kal Jeremiah never uses : nor the expression J|X"ipN DV. — Ver. 58. The plural D'?"! Jere- 
 miah never uses. ^XJ he uses once in the participle. — Ver. 59. nnjj; only here. — Ver. 62. {'lUH 
 never in Jeremiah.— Ver. 63. np^p only here. £0D], see i. 11. nr J.3p, see ver. 14 ; the word 
 is OTT. Xsy Ver. 64. SlDJ 3'12^ri never in Jeremiah ; he says VlOJ uhp. UJl'T nj^^jD in Jere- 
 miah only in the critically disputed passage xxv. 14.— Ver. 65. H^JO, nSxn, both dir. Acy— Ver. 
 66. Jeremiah uses only Niphal of ipK'- ^" "'pt^ only here. 
 
5 3. AUTHOR AND TIME OF COMPOSITION. 13 
 
 Chapter IV.— Ver. 1. DD;r, i^m (r\W) in this signification, DfO, il/lp 'J3K, never in Jeremiah. 
 
 - T TT TT ° ' VV .'I ■ : 
 
 ni:fin-S3 B^«1. see ii. 19. — Ver. 2, nSd only here. IJ3. ^l^n: Niph., never in Jeremiah. Hty^^p 
 
 T ' T T • T - : •■• -^ -I 
 
 ■^■f^' 'T (see iii. 64) only here.— Ver. 3. yhr\, 1^, 10X (Jeremiah says only "'"IJ.P^) never in 
 Jeremiah. Cij^, if the K'tib were right, we should compare Jere. li. 14, the K'ri |;^^ only here. 
 — Ver. 4. '^jn never in Jeremiah. NOV only once in Jeremiah, and then for f<p^, xlviii. 18. — 
 Ver. 5. C^l^P^ l^a in the physical sense, J^VlB, p^n. flinS'^X, never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 6. 
 
 yi'}_ '102 only here. Ver. 7. pT. "I'Tl nn^ (as a verb) never in Jeremiah, ^^n only in the 
 
 phrase 2hr\ niJ VIN. mx, D'yji3. "^"20, rriTJ never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 8. "IK/n Jeremiah uses 
 
 •T TT -T I VV -T • •: •- t:- ' ■^ 
 
 only once in the Hiph. "liriE^, Ifllf, only here. ^^3% as an adject., never in Jeremiah.— Ver. 9. 
 ^•relat., see ii. 15. 3^ in Jeremiah only xlix. 4, and in another sense. n3=ljn never in Jere- 
 miah.— Ver. 10. 'Jnni, drr. ?.£}■., W3, ni3, IdS (see ver. 15), never in Jeremiah.— Ver. 11. ^b' 
 
 •T-:|-' '-TTTT^ 
 
 never in Jeremiah.— Ver. 12. Sjn '2V;\ n^ in sing, (see i. 5, 7, 10), ^'ixi "IV (see Esth. vii. 6), 
 never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 13. D'p'"7^' ^1 only here. — Ver. 14. ^W='?J:^J never in Jeremiah, see 
 Isa. lix. 3.— Ver. 15, ioS, see ver. 10. ]*'J only here. — Ver. 16. Of pSn only the Hiphil is 
 found in Jeremiah, in one critically doubtful place, xxxvii. 12. ^'^'i^, see i. 11. D'JS Nti^J 
 never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 17. "TS^, ^k. ley. — }rp'v X7 is a phrase peculiar to Isaiah (xlv. 
 10); Jeremiah says S'';;r x'? (ii. 11).— Ver. 19. fr^ never in Jeremiah.— Ver. 20. nn 
 ^yax, I-" TTiyD, riTIt!?, never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 21. D13 "ibj^P only here, m^' m no form in Jere- 
 miah.— Ver. 22. "jiU^ cn only here. ^Z '^^^}, see ii. 14. 
 
 Chapteb V. — Ver. 1. tD'Sn^ see i. 11. — Ver. 2. For pHJ in this sense Jeremiah uses 3DJ, vi. 
 12. — Ver. 5, "^X'^ /^> HJ^n, Pual only here, ^l"', in the sense of driving, huntijig, never in 
 Jeremiah. — Ver. 7. 73D never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 8. p13 never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 9. 3in 
 
 - T I - T 
 
 13n3n only here.— Ver. 10. 103, l^iin, n3;;bl, never in Jeremiah.— Ver. 11. T\^V, see iii. 33.— 
 
 T : • - ■' - T - T T :~' T t' 
 
 Ver. 12. nSn, -nn, never in Jeremiah.— Ver. 13. "l"'"'^, «"• ?-"/— Ver. 14. nrJJ, see iii. 14.— 
 
 TT -t' I : , T . 
 
 Ver. 17. nn, see i. 13. — Ver. 18. W, relat., see ii. lo. D"7:;;ity, YJJ} Piel, never m Jeremiah, 
 who always expresses these ideas in other words. — Ver. 19. ITJ "1^7 never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 
 20. p.J< never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 21. ly^n never in Jeremiah. — Ver. 22. "»xp~nj; never in 
 Jeremiah. 
 
 I will lay no stress on the a-rra^ lEySneva, which are included for the sake of completeness in 
 the above catalogue. But besides these, there remains so great a number of words, expressions 
 and constructions foreign to the usual language of Jeremiah, that I know not how the conclu- 
 sion can be escaped, that Jeremiah could not have written the Lamentations. Or how may it 
 be explained, that Jeremiah never uses Y^''7<I^.' never "J'^X alone by itself, as a name of God, and 
 yet that the latter occurs fourteen times in the Lamentations , that Jeremiah never uses tD'^H, 
 never '^V or its root H^. never Urivd, never r\T, nJX. n3T, N^on, nOHD, ^^2, Son xS, 13;;, ^^J, 
 
 • T'. T't *• ' TT "T -T : •* T : ~ T • " T TT ' T 
 
 nin, nV3, T.wr\, nrjl Sn', D'J3 Vmi, never ioS, never the ty relat., never 3ip3 without a suffi.x, 
 
 TT TT 'V T • -T -T Tt' T' VI V: 
 
 whilst all these expressions occur more or less frequently in the Lamentations ? And, be it ob- 
 served, these expressions are not of so specific a sort that their omission in the prophetical 
 book, and their employment in the Lamentations, would be explicable from the nature of the 
 subject treated of, but they belong for a great part, if I may say so, to the home-costume of the 
 writer, which he always wears, of which he avails himself more or less unconsciously and un- 
 designedly. 1. ji J 
 
 Thirdly. The words 73^1 NIB? ijS >m ^^X'aj, ii. 14, are beyond doubt a quotation from Ezekiel 
 xii. 24 ; xiii. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 23 ; xxi. 28, 34 ; xxii. 28 ; for only in those places, and no- 
 where else in the Old Testament, does the phrase Xlt? nin in connection with /3r\ occur. The 
 
 ^ : T TT "T 
 
 phrase "'3'' ^T7?) "• 15, is also decidedly Ezekiel's, for it is found only in Ezek. xxvii. 3 ; comp. 
 
14 INTRODUCTION TO THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 xxviii. 12, and nowhere else.* That the Lamentations may be the source from which Ezekiel 
 obtained these phrases, no one can believe who has read Ezekiel in the places referred to with 
 attention. For in those places (especially in chapter liii.) everything is so peculiar and so im- 
 pressed, in construction and expression, — as where he uses /Sn, — with the distinct individuality 
 of Ezekiel, that a borrowing of the words is not to be thought of. I say the ivords, for that 
 Ezekiel had in mind the substance of Jer. xxiii., cannot be doubted. If then in Lam. ii, 14, 
 15, we have quotations from Ezekiel, what is the inference with reference to the authorship of 
 our Book by Jeremiah? In the prophetical book, even in the latest parts of it, we find no trace 
 of the adoption of Ezekiel's phraseology.f If we detect this here, it must be conceded that 
 Jeremiah might have received already some parts of Ezekiel's Book before the whole was fin- 
 ished. Were the Jeremiac origin of the Lamentations established in other respects, then per- 
 haps we could allow this particular matter to pass without question. But since the differences 
 in language strongly shake that traditional opinion, we are obliged to say that a quotation from 
 Ezekiel in the Lamentations argues rather against the opinion that Jeremiah wrote the Lamen- 
 tations, than for it. See further below, under 2d general head of this section. 
 
 We are therefore compelled to decide that the tradition which has the Septuagint for its first 
 representative rests on no solid foundation, and is in opposition especially to the philological 
 characteristics of the book. But who then did write the Lamentations ? We can take it for 
 granted that the author must have been an eye-witness of the incidents related in his book. 
 For he speaks with such warmth of feeling, with such clear insight and accurate knowledge of 
 the events he narrates, that it is evident that he does not speak of matters learned at a distance 
 and through others, but of those of which he has a direct personal knowledge and experience. 
 Especially the last two chapters, which have a more prosaic character exactly reflecting the 
 things as they actually were, are copious in details which seem to us to be copied from life. In 
 chapter fourth the author, alluding to the humiliating sufferings of the people, in order to 
 heighten the effect, describes the Israelites generally as the nobility of the nations, and then 
 especially singles out the nobility of Israel, and contrasts their former with their present condi- 
 tion. Since he thus extols the nobility of his people, with manifest predilection, yes, enthusi- 
 asm (see iv. 7, comp. i. 6, and remarks on those places), and since in this connection he says 
 nothing at all of the culpability of those high in rank, which Jeremiah makes so eminently 
 conspicuous (Jer. ii. 26 ; v. 5, 25-28 ; xxiii. 1, 2 ; xxxiv. 19 ; xxxvii.; xxxviii.; xliv. 17), but 
 on the contrary, very decidedly blames the prophets and priests, as the causers of the misfortune 
 (ii. 14; iv. 13-15), all this seems to indicate that our author belongs to the order of the D^^ 
 [the princes, or nobles]. J In this opinion we are strengthened when we read- the description 
 
 * [Dr. Naegelsliach credits himself in the Preface with the important discovery that Lam. ii. 14 is a quotation from Ezekiel. 
 The fact that this is a new discovery is suspicious. May he not have mistaken a mere coincidence in the use of language 
 for a citation of one author from another '! Our suspicion grows into certainty when we find that a quotation from Ezekiel 
 in this passage involves the necessity of an absurd and impossible translation of the word 7i3ri, — "Thy prophets saw for 
 
 thee falsehood and white-waslt .'" As regards the other words involved in these supposed quotations in ii. 14, 15, there is 
 nothing so unique or remarkable in them, but that they might have occurred to any two different writers. But even if 
 they were phrases of striking peculiarity, both writers might have borrowed them from the popular dialect of the day. The 
 American people gave to English literature in our last war many words and phrases that have since appeared simultaneously 
 in our best writers. So the Jewish people, fearfully awakened from the delusions into which their false prophets had be- 
 trayed them, may have cried out in their passion XIK^ lin. and lamented over their ruined city as '•£3'' rn^/2>i and 
 
 Ezekiel and Jeremiah, even on the assumption that the latter had not seen or heard the prophecies that were uttered in 
 Chebar, may both have adopted the phrases that were passing from mouth to mouth. We ought not to forget, either, that 
 both prophets were inspired by the same Spirit, and hence coincidences in thought and expression were to be expected. 
 Our object in these remarks is simply to show, that the repetition in the Lamentations of words and phrases in Ezekiel, does 
 not presuppose an acquaintance with Ezekiel's prophecies. But in point of fact Ezekiel's prophecies contained in chapters 
 xii. xiii. xxi. xxii. were in all probability known to the Jews in Palestine almost as soon as published inChaldea. See notes 
 on ii. 14, 15.— W. H. H.] 
 
 t [Wr do find great resemblances in phraseology between the two ; and if every remarkable expression occurring in two 
 Biithors, must be in one of them a quotation from the other, either Jeremiah quotes Ezekiel, or Ezekiel Jeremiah, very often. 
 Ol<serve, for instance, the peculiar use of nSu in the semse of captivity, and the use of symbolical names, especially lipS. 
 Jer. 1. 21 ; Ezek. xxiii. 23.— W. II. H.l 
 
 X ^This In not complimiMitary to the- author. The book itself furnishes evidence that its author could not be blinded by 
 
I 3. AUTHOR AND TIME OF COMPOSITION. 15 
 
 iv. 17-20, where the author so vividly and intelligently describes, as only an eye witness could, 
 the king's flight and his capture. He must therefore have been one of the king's companiona 
 and belonged to his court. But he seems himself to have escaped capture. Else he had shared 
 the fate of the other princes captured with the king, who according to Jer. lii. 10, were put to 
 death together at Riblah, Since he was not captured, neither could he have been transported, 
 but must have joined himself to the company of those remaining in the land who afterwards 
 fled to Egypt. Hence v, 9, 10 relate to his personal experience. 
 
 2. As regards the Time of Composition, chapter second at least must have been written after 
 the book of Ezekiel was known : for vers. 14, 15 of that chapter presuppose Ezekiel xii., xiii., 
 xxi., xxii., xxvii., consequently the first part of his writings (i.-xxxii ) at least. These 
 verses could not have been added at a later period, for they were necessary to the completeness 
 of the alphabet from the first. Still less could the whole of the second chapter have been composed 
 at a later period, for the whole work, based from beginning to end on its five-fold construction, 
 was in fact made out of one casting. But when the firsi copy of Ezekiel's writings may have 
 reached Egypt, it is impossible to ascertain. We can only say this much, that the latest date 
 mentioned in Ezekiel's writings is the 27th year of Jechoniah's captivity (Ezek. xxix. 17). 
 This refers us to the year 571 or 570 B. C, and consequently to a period about which time, ac- 
 cording to the greatest probability, Jeremiah's death occurred. For though we were obliged to 
 show [in the Commentary on Jeremiah, lii. 31-34] that it was not absolutely impossible for 
 Jeremiah to have lived till the year 561, B. C, yet this is only the extremest imaginable pos- 
 sibility. Much more likely is it that he lived only till about the year 570. See Intr. to Jere- 
 miah, pp. ix., xii. But Ezekiel, even if he received his last revelation in the year 571-570, 
 must after that have consumed some time in finishing the composition of his book, and more 
 time still must have elapsed before a copy of his writings could come from Chebar to Egypt.* 
 Besides, is it credible that Jeremiah, in his old age and while sufiering every affliction, wrote a 
 book so artistic in its construction, and so full of sprightliness, as the Book of Lamentations is? 
 It can as little be inferred from iii. 4, that the author was old, as it can from iii. 27, that he was 
 youngi But the freshness and vivacity with which the book is written, and the labor which it 
 has cost, make it improbable that it was written by an aged man in the last stage of his vital 
 powers. 
 
 3. That the five songs are the work of one and the same author, is evident from the follow- 
 ing facts and considerations: (1.) The unity of the plan, proved above. (2.) The thrice re- 
 peated initial word HD'X, in i. 1 ; ii. 1 ; iv. 1. For it would be indeed remarkable in the highest 
 degree, if different writers had begun their songs with precisely the same word. (3.) The simi- 
 larity of the language. Although verbal peculiarities occur, which distinguish the songs from 
 each other, yet a common language prevails in all. In regard to the first point, the phrase 
 DDJ? r^ occurs four times (i. 2, 9, 17, 21) and DHJa pHT once (i. 6) in the first chapter, and in 
 no other : njx: three times (i. 4, 8, 11) and substantive nnjK once (i. 22), and in no other chap- 
 ter; nailD (nbnn) three times in the first (vers. 7, 10, 11), once in the second chapter (ver. 4); 
 i?2^ five times in the second chapter (vers. 2, 5 bis, 8, 16), and exclusively there ; the same is 
 true of ^ttjtj, which occurs three times, although in different forms, in ch. ii. (vers. 11, 12, 19) ; 
 and '\^ DV occurs three times in ch. ii. (vers. 1, 21, 22), and only there. Each of the following 
 words occurs twice in ch. iii., "inj (vers. 7, 9), E^K*! (vers. 5, 19), Vn'W (vers. 21, 24, comp. vers. 
 
 the prejudices of rank, nor meanly capable of exempting his own rank from just censure. The internal evidence is in favor 
 of the opinion that he was himself a prophet and a priest, and intimately associated with the nobility of the land, if not him- 
 self a noble.— W. H. H.J 
 
 » [It is here assumed that Ezekiel's prophecies were not published till all of them, or a large portion of them, had been 
 carefully collated in book-form and that then they were formally circulated. The modern process of writing, printing, and 
 publishing, seems to be in the writer's mind. In fact, probably, each prophecy, whether first spoken or written, was instantly 
 and rapidly communicated to all the Jews. It would travel, with marching armies and numerous caravans, to Palestine, 
 and thence by various channels to Egypt, not only in written form, but repeated orally and accurately by those, who in thaj 
 age of few books and fewer readers, were able readily and exactly to memorize all that their prophets and poets composed. 
 It may be proper here again to refer to the fact that Ezek. i.-xxiii. was certainly complete before the destruction of Jeru- 
 salem, and may have been finished a year, or longer, before that event.— W. H. H.] 
 
16 INTRODUCTION TO THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 18, 26), onon (vers. 22, 32) ^3D (vers. 43, 44), rii;r and nr\^y_ (vers. 36, 59). In ch. iv. loS 
 occurs twice (vers. 10, 15). In ch. v. no similar repetition of characteristic expressions occurs. 
 I believe that these more frequent repetitions in the first chapters are due to the more lavish 
 expenditure of art, for which those chapters are remarkable. Not that these repetitions are 
 themselves indications of art ; they are rather the involuntary consequence of that constraint 
 which an artificial style imposes upon the writer. As the Poet becomes better accustomed to 
 the artificial form in ch, iii., these repetitions decrease in number.* To the same cause we must 
 ascribe the peculiarity that the Divine name "'J'lX occurs only in the first three chapters. Up 
 to the culmination point, which we recognize in the middle of ch. iii. (vers. 19-40), we find this 
 Divine name, which belongs rather to grave and solemn discourse, thirteen times, and after- 
 wards in the cZecrescem/o passage it occurs only once (iii. 58). f Apart from these repetitions 
 in one and the same chapter, which prove nothing against the identity of the author, many 
 characteristic expressions are repeated in several chapters, a fact which testifies that one and the 
 same style, or habit of speaking, prevails throughout the whole Book. The following expres- 
 sions thus occur. T\i\ i. 4, 5, 12, and iii. 32, 33. 'JJ^, i. 3, 7, 9, and iii. 1, 19. HJ;^, deprunere, 
 iii. 33, and v. 11. njl, ii. 7, and iii. 17, 31. nrjj, iii. 14, 63, and v, 14. Son xb, ii. 2, 17, 21, 
 and iii. 43. nii'-in-S3 ^^m"^, ii. 19, and iv. 1. 3iC3 {happy), iii. 26, and iv. 9. 1^ (sing.), i. 5, 
 7, 10, and iv. 12. t3'3n, i. 11, 12 ; iii. 63 ; iv. 16 ; and v. 1. ^H H^J, ii. 14, and iv. 22. ryr\^ 
 i. 13, and v. 17. t^?, relat, ii. 15, 16 ; iv. 9 ; and v. 18. IJ^iO {place or time of a festivity), i. 4, 
 15, and ii. 6, 7, 22. DDiiy, i. 4, 13, 16, and iii. 11. D'n-no, i. 7, and iii. 19. N£3n, i. 8, and iii. 
 39. •:]1T '13>, i. 12, and ii. 15. ^T^ ('^Vi;'), i. 12, 22 ; ii. 20, and iii. 51. la-ipn, i. 20, and 
 ii. 11. "'in^ :iw, i. 8, and ii. 3. "lOHD Obno), i. 7, 10, 11, and ii. 4. TO3, ii. 16, and iii. 46. 
 nj^iD Onuisn), ii. 18, and iii. 49. 'Vh., i. 2, and iii. 30. "^3;;, ii. 10, and iii. 29. 33^ mi, ii. 19, 
 and iii. 41. I think that this comparison, which contains only those instances that are most 
 apparent to the eye, strengthens the principal argument for the identity of the author of th« 
 several songs, which argument consists in the unity of the plan on which they are constructed. 
 
 I 4. Literature. 
 
 We have the Patristical Commentaries of Theodoret and Epheaem Syrus. — Jerome has not 
 explained this Book. The short Tractatus in Jeremine Lamentationes, which is found under 
 his name in the editions of his works, and which is nothing but a mystical interpretation of the 
 alphabet, was composed, according to Ghisler., Sixtus Senensis and Bellaemine (see 
 Ghislee., p. 6), by Khabanus Maurus, according to Ballarsius and others (see Vallars. 
 Tom. V. p. 1011), by the venerable Bede.— The book of Lamentations was held in high esteem 
 
 * [We must wholly dissent from any such explanation of these repetitions. To do so, were to transform some of the most 
 beautiful and impressive passages in these poems into blemishes, that betray the carelessness or the want of skill of the sa- 
 cred writer. There are few instances in which the reasons for the repetition are not apparent : none in which we cannot 
 imagine that they were intended for rhetorical or poetical effect. The constantly recurring theme in the first song, then 
 is no comforter, or she has no comforter, ia one of the master strokes of a great poet. This emphasizes again and again the 
 theme of the whole poem. This is the very acme of the distress of the daughter of Jerusalem, who having forsaken her 
 God, now siUeth solitary, herself forsaken both of God and men, she hath no comforter ! So in the second song, the day of 
 Bis wrath, and the frequent recurrence of the words anger and lorath serve to keep in view the one great thought of this 
 particular 'song, that God Himself had appeared as an enemy and an avenger. Not only was Jerusalem as a forsaken woman 
 without a comforter, God had turned against her. He had destroyed His own Zion where He dwelt among His people, and 
 all that they suffered, they suffered at His hand, and we are not for a moment allowed to forget that we are reading of what 
 God does in the. day of His wrath. The repetitions in the first chapter of that tremulous word H ]XJ, till we seem to hear 
 the broken sighs of priests and people, yea, and of the forsaken sufferer herself; and in the second chapter, of the short ex- 
 pressive word ]fl2, till we understand that nothing has escaped the desolations of Heaven's wrath, that everything is lite- 
 rally and utterly suiaZ/ouied up or consumed, are instances of that masterly art by which a great poet impresses an idea on 
 the mind by a single word, repeated again and again, with increasing emiihasis, where a writer of inferior ability would 
 weaken the force by dividing it among many words. But without mulfipl.viiig instances, it may be well here to make a 
 gener.al observation wlii.li will apply to all tliese repetitions, and that is that the language of violent passion, and ejipecially 
 ef grief, is always broken up into short words, and indulges in the frequent repetition of them.— W. H. H.] 
 
 •f- [See note on this word on p. 32.1 
 
§ 4. LITERATURE. 17 
 
 bv the Fathers. Geegoet Nazianzen says of it (in his Oral prima de pace, according to 
 Uhlslee., p. 4), " As olten as I take this book into my hands, and am engaged in reading those 
 Lamentations (whenever I do read it, I desire to be modest in the enjoyment of prosperity), my 
 voice choked with emotion is lost, my eyes are iilled with tears, and I seem to see the very 
 calamity he describes and lament with him in his lamentations." The alphabetical acrostio 
 furnished rich material for allegorical interpretation. Thus Cassiodoeus (explic. Ps. xxiv., in 
 GHiSLEE..p. 3), says, " Jeremiah bemoaned the captivity of Jerusalem in a quadruple alphabeti- 
 cal Lamentation, indicating to us, by the sacrament of letters, the mysteries of celestial things." 
 — With respect to Rabbinical Commentators, we refer to those mentioned on the Prophet Jere- 
 miah, to whom we must add Aben Ezra. — There is a Hebrew Commentary by M. Mendel- 
 sohn, on the five Megilloth, with the title OUin D;; nibjD t^on mK3l 'U2Wi^, Wien, 1807. 
 
 Of later Christian Commentators we shall in general speak of such only as treat of this book 
 alone. Paschasius Radbeetus, expositio in Lamentt. JeremisE, Colon., 1532, and other edi- 
 tions. —[Bullingee, Tigur., 1575.] — Peteus Figueieo, Comment, in Lamentt. Jer. et in Mala- 
 chiam proph., Leyden, 1596. — [Calvin, Prolog, in Threnos. — Oecolampadius, Argent. 1558. 
 ZuiNGLius, 1544 : are mentioned in Intr. Jer. — To this list Maldonatus should be added.] 
 — Maetini Del-Rio (a Jesuit), Comment. Hteralis in Threnos, Leyd., 1608. — Jo. a Jestj 
 Maria, Lamentalionum Jer. interpreiatio, Neapel, 1608. Luc. Bacmeistee, explicatio Thre- 
 norum, Rost., 1603. — TKren. Jer. latine vers, notisqice expl. a J. H. Fattenboeg, 1615 {di&s. 
 academ.). — [Petee Maetyr, Tigur., 1629.J — Taenov, Comment, in Thren., Rostock, 1G42, 
 Hamb., 1707. — [C. B. Michaelis, Notes in the Uberiores Adnot. in Hagiogr. U. T. Libros, by 
 J. H. Michaelis and others, Vol. II., 1730.] — Joh. Theoph. Lessing, observationes in Tristia 
 Jerem., Lips., 1770. — Jeremia's Klagegesdnge, iihersetzt und mit Anmm. von J, G. Boemel, 
 mit einer Vorrede begleitet von Heedee, Weimar, 1781. — J. F. Schleussnee, curse crit. et 
 exeget. in Threnos Jeremise (in Eichhorn's Repert. filr bibl. und morgenl. Literatur., P. xii., 
 Leipzig, 1783). — G. A. Hoeeer, neue Bearheitung der Klagegesdnge, Halle, 1784. — Jeremia's 
 Klagegesdnge, ixbers. und mit. Anmm. von Joel Lcewe u. Aaeon Wolfsohn, Berlin, 1790. 
 — Paeeatj, Joh. Heine., Threni Jer. philolog. et crit. illustr., Leyden, 1790. — [J. Hamon, 
 Oomm. sur les Lam. de Jeremie, Paris, 1790. — J. D. Michaelis, Obss. philol. et crit. in Jerem. 
 Vaticinia et Threnos, Edidit et auxit J. P. Schleusner, Gotting., 1793 (see Intr. Jer.). — J. K. 
 VoLBORTH, Klagegesdnge aufs neue ubers., Celle, 1795.] — Joh. Otto, dissert, philolog. critica 
 ad Thren. Jer. {prasside C. F. Schnuerer), Tubing., 1795. — J. F. Gaab, Beitrdge zur Erkl. 
 des sog. H. Lieds, Kohelets und der Klagelieder, Tiib., 1795* — J. Melch. Hartmann, die 
 Klagel. d. Jer. iibers [in den Blumen althebr. Dichtkunst v. JusTi), Giessen, 1809. — [T. A. 
 Dereser, Lie Klagelieder u. Baruch, aus d. Hebr. u. Griech. ubers. u. erkldrt, Frankf. a. M., 
 1809.] — Die Elegien des Jerem. in griech. Versmass getreu ubers. {von Welcker), Giessen 
 1810. — Threnos Jer. metrice reddidit notisque illustr., C. A. Bjoen, Havniae, 1814. — G. Riegler 
 die Klagl. des. Proph. Jer. aus dem Hebr. in's Deutsche iibers. mit Anmm., Erlangen, 1814. — 
 Feanc. Eedmann, curarum exegetico-criticarum in Jer. Thren. specimen, Rostock, 1818. — C. 
 P. CoNZ, die Klagl. d. Jer. (in Bengel's Archiv., Bd. IV. S. 146 ff.). Tub., 1821.— Theod. 
 Fritz, novi in Thr. Jer. Commentarii specimen, exegesin Cap. i. exhibens. Dissert, theol., Argent., 
 1825. — [E. F. C. RosENMUELLER, Lat. trans, and notes in his Scholia in V. T. pars 8., Vol. ii., 
 1827. See Intr. Jer.] — Spoesen, Threni, etc., suethice cum adnott. philolog., Lund., 1828. — 
 GoLDWiTZEE, Vebersetz. mit Vergl. der Sept. und Vulg. und krit. Anmm., 1828.— [Maueer, 
 Aotes in his Comm. gram. crit. in V. T, 1835, 691-708. See Intr. Jer.]— C. A. H. Kalkae, 
 Lamentt. crit. et exeg. illustr., Hafniae, 1836. — Wiedenfeld, Uebers., Elberfeld, 1838. — Tan- 
 chumi Hieeos., commeniaritis arabicus in Lamentt. e cordice unico, Bodleiano ed. Cureton 
 London, 1 843. — [A. Hetzel, Die Klagelieder in deutsche Liederform iibertragen mit erkl. anmm. 
 1854.]— Thenius, m kurzges. exeg., Hdb., 1855. Vaihingee, 1857. — [Neumann, Jeremias u, 
 Klagelieder, 1858.] — Die Thrdnenlieder des Proph. Jerem. Eine bibl. Studie von H. Beckh. 
 In der Zeitschr. f. Prot. u. K. Marz, 1861. See the " Lebensbild des Proph. Jeremia," attri- 
 buted to the same author, in the Deuischen Zeitschr. f. Christl. Wiss. etc., 1859, Nr. 19-21.— 
 F-wald in den Dichtern des A. B. Theil. i, zweite Halfte, S. 321 ff., 1866.— Z)je Klagel. Jer. 
 ubers. u ausgel. v. WiLH. Engelhaedt. Leipzig, Teubner, 1867.— [Die Klagelieder Jeremia 
 
18 INTRODUCTION TO THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 erkldrt von Dr. Ernest Gerlach, Berlin, 1868. A very valuable commentary, published about 
 the same time with this volume of Lange. — " Other translations which deserve mention here, but 
 which embrace either the poetical books or the whole of the Old Testament, are those of Dathe, 
 DeWette, Cahen, Meier, and H. A. Perret-Gentil {La Sainte Bible, Paris, 1866, publ. 
 by the Societe biblique protestante de Paris)." Smith's Diet. Bible, Am. ed., art. "Lamenta- 
 tions," note by "A." — W. H. H.] 
 
 [English Translations and Commentaries. William Lowth, Commentary upon the Prophe- 
 cies and Lametilations of Jeremiah, London, 1718, and Benjamin Blayney, Jeremiah and 
 Lamentations. A new translation with notes critical, philological and explanatory, Oxt'ord, 
 1784;, are referred to by Dr. Naegelsbach, in the Introduction to Jeremiah's Prophecies. — 
 " Jeremy the Prophet, with the Song of Moses, translated by George Joye in the month of May. 
 Svo. 1534 :" — " The Wailings [i. e. the Lamentations) of the Prophet Hierimiah, done into 
 English verse by Geo. Drant, Lond., Thomas Marshe, 1566 : — The Lamentations of Jeremy 
 with noteSf by Hugh Broughton, no place, nor printer's name, 4to, 1608 :" are mentioned in 
 Clarke's " Concise view of the succession of sacred Literature." The last is preserved in 
 "The works of the Great Albio7iean Divine, renowned in many nations for rare skill in SalenVs 
 and Athens' Tongues, and familiar acquaintance with all Rabbinical Learning, Mr. Hugh 
 Broughton ; collected into one volume, and digested into four Tomes. London, printed for 
 Nath. Ekins, 1662." The Preface, containing life of H. Broughton, is signed John Lightfoot. 
 The translation is one of the first into English directly from the Hebrew, and is characterized by 
 great simplicity and force, and an agreeable musical rhythm. The notes are curious, but of 
 little exegetical value, and abruptly terminate with the sixth verse of the second chapter, as if 
 the author tired of them, for he closes with this singular remark : " And further large comment- 
 ing I shall not need. The learned in Ebrew upon a warning may by mine examples search 
 how still from other holy writers Jeremy fetches his phrases." — The very valuable Anriotations 
 of Westminster Assembly, contributed by John Gataker, about 1642. — Nearly the whole Book 
 of Lamentations is " metrically analyzed and translated " in a work showing considerable know- 
 ledge of Hebrew and a very weak judgment, called Hebrew Criticism and Poetry, by George 
 Somers Clarke, D.D., London, 1810. — " The Calvin Translation Society," in Vol. V. of Cal- 
 vin's Commentaries, Edinburgh, 1855, have given us, besides the valuable Commentary on 
 the Lamentations, a metrical version in English of Calvin's Latin Version; the translator 
 and editor, Rev. John Owen, Vicar of Thrussington, and rural Dean, Leicestershire, has 
 added many notes of his own, and sometimes gives us a new translation from the Hebrew. 
 The quotations from Calvin's Commentary in the following pages, made by the present trans- 
 lator, are all taken from Owen's translation, without reference to the original. — '^The Holy 
 Bible . . . now translated from corrected texts of the original Tongue, and with former trans- 
 lations diligently compared, . . . by B. Boothroyd, D.D." London, 1853. Boothroyd in the 
 translation of the Lamentations has copied too closely the translation of Blayney, which 
 with all its excellencies, is often fanciful and sometimes rests on merely conjectural changes 
 of the received text : Boothroyd aflFords little exegetical help in his brief notes, many of 
 which are unmarked quotations from Blayney. — Deservedly better known is the transla- 
 tion from the original Hebrew and Commentary, by E. Henderson, D.D. London, 1851 — The 
 " American Unitarian Association," has furnished us with a new translation of Lamentations, 
 with notes, by George R. Noyes, D.D., Vol, 2d of the Hebrew Prophets. 3d edition. Boston, 
 1866. The notes are good, but meagre and insufficient. The translation generally is marked 
 by taste and good judgment, but sometimes indicates haste and absence of careful study. — The 
 notes of Chr. Wordsworth, D.D., Bishop of Lincoln, in Vol. V., Part IL, of his '' Holy Bible, 
 in the authorized version, with notes and introductions," London, 1869, make us wish that 
 they were more numerous and more extended. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Of Homiletical Treatises, should be mentioned the Condones in Thren. Jer., by the Francis- 
 can Joh. Wild (Ferus), Colon., 1570; but especially, the admirable and frequently found 
 Seventeen Sermons, which were delivered by Egid. Hunnius, at that time Professor in Mar- 
 burg, in the year 1585, at Frankenberg in Hesse, to which place the University was removed 
 'j-om time to time on account of the plague, and which were afterwards published under the 
 
ADDITIONAL REMARKS ON THE QUESTION OF AUTHORSHIP. I'J 
 
 title of " Die Klagelieder des h. Proph. Jer. ausgelegt u. erJd. zu Frankenberg, in 17 Predig- 
 ten," etc. First ed., 1588. I have the third edition : Frankfurt a. M , 1600. 
 
 ADDITIONAL REMARKS ON THE QUESTION OF AUTHORSHIP. 
 
 BY W. H. H. 
 
 The commonly received opinion that Jeremiah was the author of the Lamentations is sua* 
 tained by the following considerations : 
 
 1. The presumptive probability that Jeremiah was th6 author is strong. Dr. Naegelsbach 
 concedes its force (see p. 9). 
 
 Jeremiah survived the fall of the city long enough to have written this book. The authentic 
 records of his history close with his residence among the Jewish fugitives in Tahpanhes, Egypt 
 (Jer. xliii. 8). Whether we accept the early Christian tradition that " the Jews at Tahpanhes, 
 irritated by his rebukes, at last stoned him to death " (Smith's Bib. Did.), or the report that 
 he was " put to death by king Hophra " (Milman's Hist, of the Jews) ; or adopt the more likely 
 belief of the Jews, " that on the conquest of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar, he with Baruch made 
 his escape to Babylon or Judea and died in peace," having lived to add the last words appended 
 to his prophecies, Jer. lii. 31-34 (see Smith's Bib. Diet., art. " Jeremiah," Stanley's Jewish 
 Church, Series 2d, p. 620), — it is at least certain, that Jeremiah survived the destruction of 
 Jerusalem long enough to have written the Lamentations, which include historical facts not 
 complete till after the death of Gedaliah and the flight to Egypt. Surviving, it is next to in 
 credible, that he, the prophet of the destruction, should not be the author of this poem ot 
 lamentation over the great event and issue of his prophetical career. Who can read first his 
 prophetical book and then this description of the city and the people after the destruction of the 
 former, and not say, — if Jeremiah still lived, Jeremiah and no other was the painter of this 
 picture, in which all the conspicuous figures are what his former writings would lead us to ex- 
 pect, which presents an exact fulfilment of all he predicted, and which so corresponds with the 
 doctrine, facts and previsions, contained in the prophetical book, that when we turn from one 
 to the other, it is difficult to say which picture is most like the reality, — which is the mirror 
 that most accurately reflects the downfall of the State and the dispersion of the people ! " The 
 poems belong unmistakably to the last days of the kingdom, or the commencement of the exile. 
 They are written by one who speaks, with the vividness and intensity of an eye-witness, of the 
 misery which he bewails. It might almost be enough to ask, who else then living could have 
 written with that union of strong passionate feeling and entire submission to Jehovah, which 
 characterizes both the Lamentations and the Prophecy ot Jeremiah ?" (Smith's Bib. Diet. art. 
 Lament.). Who can believe that Jeremiah, after continuing to speak and write for God through 
 a long life-time, so suddenly dropped the pen and remained silent and suffered a total eclipse 
 from the splendor of an unknown author, to whose identity neither Scripture nor tradition give 
 us the slightest clue ? 
 
 2. The presumption that Jeremiah wrote the Lamentations is confirmed by the most decisive 
 testimony of tradition. 
 
 Few historic facta are sustained by a tradition so ancient, so long undisputed and so generally 
 received. The truthfulness of this tradition was never, we may say, seriously questioned till 
 the middle of this century, when Ewald gave his verdict against it. Up to that time, with the 
 exception of an anonymous writer in 1819, and the whimsical Von der Haardt in 1712, it 
 was universally accepted by Jews and Christians. We trace it back through the Vulgate, the 
 Syriac and the Septuagint versions, to the probable evidence of Hebrew MSS. earlier than the 
 oldest of those versions (see note p. 8). The existence of such Hebrew MSS. is entirely pro- 
 bable. It is easier to account for the loss of what once were the connecting words between the 
 Prophecies of Jeremiah and the Lamentations, by the transfer of the latter to the Hagiographa, 
 than it is to explain the insertion of the words in the Septuagint and their reproduction, with 
 additions and changes, in the Vulgate, if they never existed in Hebrew originals. It is impos- 
 sible to suppose that the Septuagint translators inserted in the text a mere presumption of their 
 own, " derived from the book itself," as Dr. Naegelsbach suggests. If it could be proved that 
 
20 INTRODUCTION TO THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 they did not find these words in Hebrew MSS., we must believe that they received them 
 through written or oral tradition, that had descended to them from earlier ages and was, in their 
 times, universally accepted and undisputed. It is not credible that such a tradition could have 
 been founded in error. When and how could an error, in reference to the authorship of this 
 book, have come into universal acceptation previous to the translation by the Seventy? It is 
 asserted that other writings, of unknown authorship, were attributed by the Jews to Jeremiah 
 (Smith's Bib. Did.; Stanley's Jewish Oh.). But there is no evidence of their having attri- 
 buted to him a canonical book, that had always been esteemed canonical, and had never been 
 lost sight of or forgotten. There is reason to believe that this book was highly valued by the 
 exiled Jews, and was in their possession on their return from captivity (Smith's Bib. Diet., art. 
 Lam.). From that time to the time of the translation of the LXX., the Jews, cured of idola- 
 try, cherished their sacred Scriptures and especially revered the memory and the words of the 
 prophet Jeremiah. During this long period, we can fix upon no point of time, when the true 
 history of this extraordinary book could have been lost, when the brilliant name of its real 
 author could have lapsed into oblivion, or when the fable could have been fabricated, that was 
 destined to be universally accepted as a historic truth, that Jeremiah was that author. 
 
 3. The facts related or referred to in the book render it certain that Jeremiah wrote the 
 book. 
 
 We have already ascertained that he lived long enough after the events alluded to had hap- 
 pened, to have written about them. We have also intimated that the topics discussed or sug- 
 gested in the Lamentations are exactly what we would expect to find in a writing of Jeremiah's, 
 composed after the destruction of Jerusalem. To this we now add, that the assumption that 
 the Lamentations were written by one, who had been both a spectator of the events described 
 and a participator in those events, points directly to Jeremiah as the probable author of the book. 
 This assumption, indeed, is not inevitable ; for not all graphic descriptions of events are writ- 
 ten by those who participated in them : what eye-witness, for example, could bring the reader 
 more immediately into the presence of actors and scenes far remote from the writer, than Dean 
 Stanley, who has given us his eloquent version of the same incidents in Jewish history? But 
 granting the assumption in the present instance, who could have been a more authentic writer 
 of the facts contained in the Book of Lamentations, than the prophet Jeremiah ? Or what great 
 event is described in that Book, that was not witnessed and participated in by the prophet Jere- 
 miah ? Dr. Naegelsbach suggests only one possible exception ; he would infer, from the 
 description of the flight irom Jerusalem and the pursuit and capture of the king and the princes, 
 that the author of Lamentations was a companion of the king and one of the princes of the 
 court. To this we answer ; 1st. There is no intimation that even one of those princes escaped 
 the slaughter at Riblah • " and the king of Babylon slew the sons of Zedekiah before his eyes : he 
 slew also all the princes of Judah in Riblah." 2d. There is absolutely nothing, in the brief allu- 
 sion in the Lamentations to the flight and capture of the king, that indicates that it was written 
 by a companion of the king. The only possible reference to this tragical incident is contained 
 in two verses, iv. 19, 20.* The 19th verse, — "Our persecutors are swifter than the eagles of the 
 heaven ; they pursued us upon the mountains, they laid wait for us in the wilderness," — is in no 
 sense personal to the writer, nor is its application to be restricted to the king and his army; but 
 is spoken with reference to the whole people, as the preceding verses show, and refers to the 
 rapid pursuit of all fugitives from the city, whether they endeavored, like the king, to find 
 safety in the mountains of Jericho or the wilderness of Judea, or in any other mountains or 
 wildernesses in the vicinity of the doomed city. The first member of ver. 20, — " the breath of our 
 nostrils, the anointed of the Lord, was taken in their pits, ^' — simply states the fact of the king's 
 capture, without any incidental detail, such as would indicate a description of the event by an 
 eye-witness; and the second member of this verse, — "o/ whom we said. Under his shadow we 
 shall live among the heathen,^' — is the language of the people generally, not of the companion.s 
 of the king only, for the desire of the nation doubtless was, that their king should escape to some 
 place of security, even among the heathen, whither they might follow him, and where they 
 
 • See notes ou it. 17-20, and m>tv at end of cb. iv. 
 
ADDITIONAL REMARKS ON" THE QUESTION OF AUTHORSHIP. 21 
 
 might gather around him and perpetuate their monarchy and nationality. There is, then, 
 nothing in these two verses to embarrass the conclusion that Jeremiah wrote the Lamenta- 
 tions. 
 
 Having shown that there is nothing in this Book involving the personal experience and ob- 
 servation o{ the author, that renders ii impossible for Jeremiah to have been that author, we 
 come now to the fact, that there is much in this Book which belongs peculiarly and exclusively 
 to the personal history of that prophet. This is especially true of the third chapter or song. 
 Here we clearly have the prophet Jeremiah speaking to us. Dr. Naegelsbach himself is com- 
 pelled to acknowledge this. But he says that the writer of the Book personifies the prophet 
 and puts these words into his mouth. Who can believe this ? Who could justify the sudden 
 intrusion of anew speaker into such a finished composition, without a hint, either preceding 
 or following his soliloquy, as to his name, rank, or official position? Who would imagine that 
 any intelligent author would attempt such an abrupt assumption of another man's personality? 
 Who can believe in the possibility of such a complete identification between an author and a 
 character dramatically introduced into his poem ? Either Jeremiah wrote the whole poem, or 
 he wrote no part of it. If he wrote the whole, the 3d chapter, beginning with the words " I am 
 the man thai hath seen affliction," is natural, lucid and appropriate. If Jeremiah did not write 
 the poem, this third chapter is certainly intended to deceive us into the belief that he did. Other- 
 wise, it is an anomaly and solecism in literature, that no reputable writer could be guilty of. 
 The argument that a modest man would not make himself the central object in his own poem, 
 is of no force; especially when we remember that the poet is also the prophet of Jehovah, and not 
 only on that account a representative man, but a living prophecy in his own life, as Rosea was. 
 Besides, the argument may be offset by another consideration, that a poet, as skilful as the au- 
 thor of Lamentations was, would not leave us to guess who the central figure of his poem is, by 
 the mere accidental coincidences of historical details. Indeed, we find in this absence of his-name 
 and titles the best evidence, that the modest Jeremiah was himself the author; for if another 
 had written the Book, he would have had every inducement to tell us, that the great and holy 
 prophet Jeremiah was the speaker in this 3d Song. The whole argument for modesty, however, 
 is greatly overstrained, and receives no support from the free and frank way in which Jeremiah 
 speaks of himself in his prophecies. 
 
 4. Characteristics and similarities of style add still further evidences to the fact that Jere- 
 miah wrote the Lamentations. 
 
 Arguments derived from style are precarious. The investigations into the authorship of 
 Junius admonish us that the most astute critics may be deceived, and that it is possible for an 
 author to excel himself in one single production beyond the recognition of his most intimate 
 and sagacious friends. In the present instance, we encounter the difficulty of determining what 
 are the general characteristics of Jeremiah's style. Till the critics decide this point, the ques- 
 tion whether the Lamentations harmonize with his style must be demurred. " Jerome com- 
 plained of a certain rusticity in Jeremiah's style," an idea that Naegelsbach seems to accept 
 (See p. 12. Sertno incultus et pene subrusticus.)* Lowth confesses that he can discover no 
 vestige of this rusticity, he thinks that in several of his prophecies he "approaches very near the 
 sublimity of Isaiah," he regards Ezekiel as " much inferior to Jeremiah in elegance " {Sacred 
 Poetry of the Hebrews, Gregory's translation, IL, pp. 88, 89). Lowth also compares him to 
 feimonides ; and Seb. Schmidt compares him to Cicero (Smith, Bib. Die, Art., Jeremiah). 
 Bishop Wordsworth, speaking of him as " peculiarly the prophet of the affections," calls him 
 "the Euripides — and more than the Euripides — of the Hebrew canon" (Introduction to Jere- 
 miah, p. XV.). — There is again a conflict of opinion in regard to the merits of the Lamentations 
 as a work of art and taste. Ewald speaks of it slightingly as possessing some merit. Notes al- 
 most reproduces Ewald's language, when he says, " The Lamentations are, indeed, possessed of 
 considerable merit in their way, but still betray an unpoetic period and degenerated taste " 
 [Introduction to Psalms, p. 48). On the other hand, Naegelsbach accords the highest place to 
 
 * This opinion of Jerome might have been caused by the use of Aramaic forms and other peculiarities of later Hebrew. 
 EiCHHOBN, Einltitung, III., p. 122. Gesenitjs, Geshicte der Beb. Sprache, p. 35. Referred to in Kitto's Oyc. Sac. Lit, art. 
 Jeremiah. 
 
22 INTRODUCTION TO THE LAMENTATION'S OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 the Book as a work of art, and regards its production as far above and beyond the ability of the 
 
 uncultured and almost rustic Jeremiah. He is certainly right in his appreciation of the style of 
 the Lamentations, and many of the best judges of style agree with him. " Never was there a 
 more rich and elegant variety of beautiful images and adjuncts, arranged together within so small 
 a compass, nor more happily chosen and applied " (Lowth, De Sac. Foes. Heb. Praelect. XXII. 
 KiTTO, Oyc. Bib. Lit.). "Never did city suffer a more miserable fate, never was ruined city 
 lamented in language so exquisitely pathetic. Jerusalem is, as it were personified, and bewailed 
 with the passionate sorrow of private and domestic attachment: while the more general 
 pictures of the famine, the common misery of every rank, and age, and sex, all the desolation, 
 the carnage, the violation, the dragging away into captivity, the remembrance of former glories, 
 of the gorgeous ceremonies, and the glad festivals, the awful sense of the Divine wrath heighten- 
 ing the present calamities, are successively drawn with all the life and reality of an eye-witness. 
 They combine the truth of history with the deepest pathos of poetry" (Milman, Hist, of Jews, 
 vol. I. B. viii. p. 260). Before we leave this matter of the general characteristics of the style 
 of Jeremiah's prophecies and of the style of the Lamentations, we would repeat an assertion al- 
 ready made, that there must be, in the nature of the case, great diversity between " the oratorical 
 prose" (as Bishop Wordsworth calls it) of the one* and the rhythmical lyrical poetry of the other. 
 The acrostic structure of the Lamentations is regarded as a peculiarity of style that Jere- 
 miah would not have adopted. " De Wette maintains [Comment, i'lber die Fsahn, p. 56) that 
 this acrostic form of writing was the outgrowth of a feeble and degenerate age, dwelling on the 
 outer structure of poetry when the soul had departed. His judgment as to the origin and 
 character of the alphabetic form is shared by Ewald {Poet. Buck., I, p. 140). It is hard, how- 
 ever, to reconcile this estimate with the impression made on us by such Psalms as the 25th and 
 34th ; and Ewald himself, in his translation of the Alphabetic Psalms and the Lamentations, 
 has shown how, compatible such a structure is with the highest energy and beauty " (Smith's 
 Bib. Diet., art. Lament., n. g.). The modern acrostic— the spelling out of words or sentences 
 in the initial letters of rhymed verses — is justly regarded as a species of literary trifling, pleasing 
 only to a fanciful, finical or puerile taste. If the alphabetical acrostic of the Hebrews is also to 
 be regarded as belonging merely to the curiosities of literature, the chief or whole merit of the 
 production consisting in the acrostic itself, or derived from the difficulties to be overcome, an ex- 
 hibition of literary acrobatism— poetry on an alphabetical tight-rope, — then we may condemn 
 it as an evidence of vitiated taste, and should regard it as beneath the dignity of any inspired 
 writer, and especially of such a glorious and venerable prophet as Jeremiah was. But we 
 find on examination, that these alphabetical Hebrew poems have great merit, aside from 
 their acrostic form, which they retain when stripped of that form, as they are in our modern 
 translations. This and the fact that this form was ever adopted by inspired writers, 
 lead us to the conclusion that the Hebrew alphabetical acrostic must have served a far higher 
 purpose than our modern acrostics do. It is not impossible that it may have belonged to 
 the highest art of ancient Hebrew poetry, though we, now, may not be able to appreciate 
 all the excellencies an ancient Hebrew might have discerned in this species of writing.f 
 
 * "There remains a single class of poets among the Jews— a class peculiar to that people— the prophets. The most of 
 them delivered their predictions in poetry. It is mi generis. It is not precisely poetry, nor is it oratory. It is sublime 
 vision. The event seen passing before the mental eye of the prophet is revealed in lofty rhythm, in glowing imagery. It is 
 eloquent in the highest sense, and stands near the line where oratory and poetry meet. It will be observed that the most 
 impassioned strains of the greatest orators become rhythmical, and have a solemn march whicli resembles vision. We sei> 
 it in all their greatest efforts " (Pres. Quart. Rev., Jan. 1861, Art.lY., Hehreiv Lang, and Poetyy,p. 40.3). 
 
 t Gkrlacu : •' That the alphabetical arrangement may be regarded iis inappropriate to Jeremiah, when his .soul was filled 
 with sorrow, can onlv be maintained by regarding tlie metrical style of poetry as generally inconsistent with deep grief, 
 which no one presumes to do. Here the argument finally depends on the question as to the signiftcation of this alphabetical 
 arrangement. De Wette {Cbmm. Psalms, p. 58), declares it 'a rhythmical artifice, a product of the later and degenerated 
 taste' (E. Reuss in Herzog'.s Encyc. V., p. 90G. Speierhi), and Ewai.d (Poet, lluch. I., S. 139. 3 Aufl. I., S. 201) esteems it a 
 sign of ' declining art; against what Sommer (bihl. Ahhandl, S. 94) says for the higher age of this form of poetry (as HiTZiG 
 also, at least he does not deny the Davi.lical authorship of Ps. ix. and x. on account of the alphabetical structure). But if 
 it were j.roved that such an artificial construction were, on general grounds, unworthy of the prophet, then ' with equal 
 propriety we would condemn the Songs, BrfiM du deine Wege, by I'. Gkrhahiit, and Wie schim V'uc?d uns der Morge.nstem, 
 by Nicniu, since there is an artificialness in the beginning of the verses, sucli as we could not expect in poets so pre- 
 eminent and vigorous ' (UENGSTENBERa, Ps. 2, S. 93); and even Thenius allows (S. 190) that this were hypercritical. So 
 
ADDITIONAL REMARKS ON THE QUESTION OF AUTHORSHIP. 23 
 
 Without doubt it had mnemonic advantages and also served the purpose of an artificial vin- 
 culura for thoughts and sentences having no close logical connection. But we cannot accept the 
 opinion that these were its only or even its chief recommendations.* Jeremiah might have been 
 influenced by the first reason in adopting this style in the Lamentations: but the other could 
 hardly have influenced him, for the Lamentations are not composed of thoughts and sentences 
 loosely connected, as has been too often asserted, needing to be strung together by this alphabeti- 
 cal artifice ; on the contrary there is a very close logical connection and a consecutive flow of 
 thought in these poems, and that this is not always apparent is owing to this very alphabetical 
 structure, which sometimes breaks up and interrupts the sense, and is in this respect an actual 
 hinderance to the natural and proper connection of sentiment and expression. It is, therefore, im- 
 possible that Jeremiah chose it for the purpose of supplying by artificial means the lack of logical 
 connection in the subject matter of his poem. He must have been influenced by other considera- 
 tions. What were they? We can, we think, specify three reasons, any one of which would 
 justify his adoption of this style, and all of which probably combined in determining the external 
 structure of this exquisite poem. 1. The assistance afi'orded by this alphabetical structure in 
 maintaining the rhythmical parallelism of the poem. The parallelism of the Lamentations, as 
 may be seen at a glance, is not the usual parallelism of thought and sentiment, so characteristic 
 of Hebrew poetry : but it is strictly the parallelism of rhythm (see Noyes, Introduction to 
 Psalms, pp. 43-46). "The simply rhythmical parallelism holds the most prominent place in the 
 Lamentations of Jeremiah. Here the parallelism of thoughts is to be reckoned almost among 
 the exceptions, and when it does occur, it is, for the most part, the subordinate parallelism of a 
 member by itself; in general, the rhythm alone predominates, and that too with a regularity 
 which is rare among Hebrew poets, producing here a suitable effect, namely, monotony of com- 
 plaint" (NoYES, ib., p. 45). This rhythm consists in dividing each verse into three members in 
 chap, i., ii., iii., into two members in chap, iv., and in making each verse of chapter v. consist of 
 one member, and in balancing each member with a caesura, " which coincides with the sense and 
 the accent," though "we are sometimes under the necessity of abandoning the accents, because 
 they follow the sense, while the rhythm is independent of the sense " (Noyes). This peculiar 
 construction gives to the Hebrew original " that conciseness and brevity " which, as Henderson 
 remarks {Introduction, p. 277), it is impossible to exhibit in a translation. But rhythmical 
 parallelism, as Noyes observes, " is too loose a form to retain an exuberant matter without 
 passing over into the prosaic style." This is to be guarded against. In the absence of the 
 parallelism of thoughts and sentiments, how shall the writer distinguish his poetry from mere 
 prose composition, in which rhythm often occurs without constituting poetry? To meet this 
 difficulty, the advantage of the artificial restraint of the alphabetical structure is obvious. At 
 equal periods, both writer and reader are reminded, in the absence of parallel thoughts, that the 
 rhythmical parallelism is ended, and is to begin anew. Thus the writer is checked and curbed 
 and saved from the fault of an inelegant redundancy of expression, while the reader is instructed 
 to observe the proper inflections and to expect some new change of thought or expression. If 
 the original was written without points, as doubtless it was, we can readily apprehend how al- 
 most necessary some such artificial help to correct writing and reading, as this alphabetical struc- 
 
 much the stranger is the contradiction into which he falls when he asserts (5. 124), that the expansion of the alphabetical 
 •tructure in ch. iii., is 'an artificiality, to which only a less spiritual poet could confine himself, and which alone by itselt 
 repels the thought that Jeremiah could have composed this poem.' Very far from necessarily indicating a peculiarly arti- 
 ficial style, ' the alphabetical structure rather belongs to the means of giving to poetical writing the cliaracter of connected 
 ness which is necessary to it ' (Hengstenberg, ib. loc), and has for its object ' to give to such songs, as do not allow of being 
 rounded-off and finished by the internal development of the thoughts, the character of a complete composition by means of 
 passing through the whole alphabet — the symbol of completeness ' (Keil in Haevernick, EUnl., III. 8, 48, vgl., 514)." 
 
 * LoWTH : " The acrostic or alphabetical poetry of the Hebrews was certainly intended to assist the memory, and was con- 
 finet? altogether to those compositions which consisted of detached maxims or sentiments without any express order or con- 
 nection " (Gregory's Trans. II., Led. 22, p. 134). Gerlach with dogmatic positiveness denies that the object of this form was 
 "of the external sort, to assist the recollection of the learners, as IIuet, Lowth, and lately Thenius assume." It could not 
 tail, however, to facilitate the memorizing of the poems thus written ; and in an age when the recitation of poems from 
 memorj- was the prevailing fashion, and in lyrical poems the recitations were sung, rather than pronounced, to the aoconi- 
 paninient of music, the alphabetical structure possessed advantages that the greatest poets would not despise. Gerlach is 
 also at fault, when, like Lowth, he would confine the use of the alphabetical itructure to the connection of detached sea- 
 toDces or thoughts only loosely related to each other. 
 
24 INTRODUCTION TO THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 ture afforded, may have been. It is not impossible that the poem, as originally written, could 
 not have been intelligibly read, without great difl&culty, but for this artificial and alphabetical 
 arrangement. 2. This artificial structure gives to the Poem an expression of unity and complete- 
 ness. The five songs, each of twenty -two verses, four of them alphabetically arranged, the middle 
 one repeating the alphabet three times, the last one, not alphabetical, but short, rapid and metrical, 
 compose a symmetrical whole, that would be vitiated by any structural change whatever. Even 
 through the eye, this external form, when clearly written, must have conveyed to the mind a con- 
 viction that the five Songs composed one poem. The visual effect was an aid to the intellectui^l ap- 
 prehension of the design and spiritual purport of the poem. It is one, and only one.* The architec- 
 tural idea suggested by Naegelsbach is thus perfected, a temple rising to the crowning dome 
 supported by the well proportioned columns that rest on a common foundation. Or we may ima- 
 gine our poem a Jacob's ladder, each golden round of which is denoted by a letter; as this ladder 
 rises from earth to heaven, the separate steps, at first wide apart, grow closer together, and then 
 their distinctive marks are lost to sight and we can only see that the top of the ladder is over- 
 shadowed with the glory of God amidst the clouds of incense of prayer and adoration. These illus- 
 trations, if deemed over fanciful, may yet serve to show how the alphabetical structure of the poem 
 assists our conception of it as a whole, binds together its separate parts and gives it the expres- 
 sion of unity and completeness. 3. The alphabetical structure was a mechanical assistance to 
 the writer, helping him to curb and control his own emotions and check the ebullitions of violent 
 and turbulent grief. This is the view taken by the author of the article on Lamentations in Dr. 
 Wm. Smith's Dictionary of the Bible. He says, "the choice of a structure so artificial as that 
 which has been described above, may at first sight appear inconsistent with the deep intense sor- 
 row of which it claims to be the utterance. Some wilder, less-measured rhythm would seem to us 
 to have been a fitter form of expression. It would belong, however, to a very shallow and hasty 
 criticism to pass this judgment. A man true to the gift he has received will welcome the dis- 
 cipline of self-imposed rules for deep sorrow as well as for other strong emotions. In proportion 
 as he is afraid of being carried away by the strong current of feeling, will he be anxious to make 
 the laws more difficult, the discipline more effectual. Something of this kind is traceable in the 
 fact that so many of the master-minds of European literature have chosen, as the fit vehicle for 
 their deepest, tenderest, most impassioned thoughts, the complicated structure of the sonnet ; 
 also in Dakte's selection of the terza rima for his vision of the unseen world. What the sonnet 
 was to Petrarch and to Milton, that the alphabetic verse system was to the writers of Jeremiah's 
 time, the most difficult among the recognized forms of poetry, and yet one in which (as- 
 suming the earlier date of some of the [alphabetical] Psalms . . . ) some of the noblest thoughts 
 of that poetry had been uttered. We need not wonder that he should have employed it as 
 fitter than any other for the purpose for which he used it." Bishop Wordsworth gives the 
 same reason why Jeremiah adopted this form. "Like persons of strong emotions, he trembles 
 at the power of his own passions, and resorts to mechanical helps, which may employ his atten- 
 tion, and may save him from being overcome by his feelings, and swept away by the strong tide 
 and current of the violent impetuosity of his passions. As an Alpine traveller, skirting the 
 sharp edge of a precipice, is not unthankful for the wooden hand-rail which runs along it, and by 
 which he supports his steps if his eyes become dizzy at the sight of the dark deep gulf and the 
 foaminw cataract below him, so Jeremiah does not disdain to lean on artificial supports in the most 
 vf-hement outbursts of his emotions. His Lamentations amid the ruins of Jerusalem are the 
 most impassioned utterances of Hebrew poetry ; and the alphabetical arrangement of the stanzas, 
 which at first sight may seem to be a rigid mechanical device, was doubtless designed, not only 
 as a help to the memory of his Hebrew fellow-countrymen, who would recite them in their cap- 
 tivity and dispersion, but also to be a stay and support to himself in his own vehement agitations" 
 (Introduction to Jeremiah, p. xv.). 
 
 The vigor and vivacity of style have been urged as a reason why Jeremiah could not, in 
 his old age, have composed the Lamentations. These we are told reveal a young man. The 
 
 * " In order to give to the Lamentations, ever expressed in new words, images and turns of thought, the character of com- 
 pleteniss ;nid of a connected production, tliese Songs are, with the exception of the last one, constructed alphabetically" 
 IKeil, KinUitung des All. Test., 1 126, p. 377). 
 
ADDITIONAL REMARKS ON THE QUESTION OF AUTHORSHIP. 26 
 
 expression in iii 27 is appealed to as a plausible evidence that the writer was young. This 
 sage observation, however, " It is good for a man that he bear the yoke in his youth," is 
 certainly the grave, mature reflection of an old man. The young are not apt to appreciate 
 the benefits of affliction. It is the old man of long experience and long observation, wh:> 
 looking backward, as it is the habit of old men to do, discerns the wholesome discipline there 
 was in the sorrows and trials of earlier years. In this very verse, therefore, as in the whole 
 book, we recognize the tone and spirit of an aged man ; — of a man who has, in fact, left hope 
 in regard to the things of this world behmd him, and exchanged it for a sublime faith in the 
 fulfilment of Divine purposes and promises in a future that lies beyond the terminus of his own 
 individual life-time, — such faith as bought the field in Anathoth, when the prophet was fully 
 persuaded that he himself would derive no benefit from it. — But it is not certain that Jeremiah 
 had arrived at an extreme old age when the Book of Lamentations was written In the thirteenth 
 year of Josiah, he speaks of himself as " a child." He may have been then as young as was 
 Samuel, when he was called to the prophetical office, in which case Jeremiah would have been not 
 more than fifty-three years of age when Jerusalem was destroyed. But had he been twenty years 
 old in the thirteenth year of Josiah, he would have been just over sixty at the destruction of 
 Jerusalem, and in the very prime of intellectual and moral vigor. — But granting the possibility 
 that he might have been seventy or eighty years of age, or even older, it should not surprise us. 
 that he, the prophet of God, writing by inspiration of the Spirit of God, should produce a book 
 which is confessedly written with a mental force unabated and a versatility of genius unimpaired. 
 Nor would it be "by any means a singular instance of a richer and mellower imagination at the 
 close of life, than during its morning or its meridian. This for example was remarkably the case 
 with the magnificent Burke." The writer just quoted, speaking of the Book of Ecclesiastes and 
 its aged author, says : "Solomon, at the close of his life here hived up the wisdom of past years 
 for our instruction. * * The setting of the sun of the great Master of wisdom, whom God Him- 
 self made chief of learned men, threatened indeed to be enveloped with dark clouds, but its rays 
 broke nobly forth before it passed below the horizon, and upon those clouds are nainted the rich 
 hues of mingled imagination and philosophy'' {Pres. Quart. Review, Jan. 1861, Art. IV., p. 462). 
 Jeremiah, too, at the close of life, compressed the spirit and the teachings of all his prophecies into 
 one wondrous poem, excelling all he had before written in the vigor of its conception, and force, 
 beauty and pathos of its expression. His life and his ministry had been like a stormy day. But 
 that day was not abruptly ended, as was threatened, in the dark night of Jerusalem's destruction. 
 For him there remained a protracted evening twilight, comparatively calm and tranquil, though 
 sorrowful always and perturbed with some fitful returns of stormy experiences, as the animosities 
 of Egyptians and Israelites against him, provoked by his prophecies in Tahpanhes, indicate (see 
 Jer. xliii., xliv.) : and in these chastened hours, before his life finally dissolved in tears, his genius 
 gathered into one harmonious composition, the spirit and truth of his eloquent prophecies, to re- 
 main for ever the crown and glory of his ministry in the church of God. 
 
 We have shown that there is nothing in the style of the Lamentations incompatible with thp 
 belief that Jeremiah was their author. We are now to exhibit the evidences of certain simi- 
 larities of style between Jeremiah's Prophecies and the Lamentations, which confirm our belief 
 that both Books were the production of one author. 1. The individual temperament of Jere- 
 miah, as evinced in his acknowledged writings, was precisely that of the elegiac poet of the 
 Lamentations; occupied with the present and actual, rather than given to discursive flights 
 into the regions of the distant and possible ; sensitive, quick in susceptibility ; ready to ex- 
 press his emotions and never concealing them, revealing " unreservedly the secret recesses and 
 inmost working of his own heart " ( Wordswoeth) ; passionate in his grief, and prone to linger 
 among the causes of his sorrow and brood over them and harp upon them ; and tender-hearted 
 towards others and sympathetic, throwing himself " unhesitatingly into the condition of those to 
 whom he speaks" (Wordsworth). 2. The religious characteristics of Jeremiah reappear in 
 the Lamentations. The same disposition to hold both God and the people firm to covenant en- 
 gagements : the habit of tracing suff'ering to sin : the quick discernment of punishment, past 
 or coming, on Jew and Gentile. What has been said of Jeremiah with reference to his pro- 
 phecies, may be affirmed of the author of the Lamentations : " the Religion, the Monarchy 
 
26 INTRODUCTION TO THE LAMENTATlOxNS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 and the other Institutions of his country, seem to be absorbed and concentrated in him ; and 
 his own individuality is lost in sympathy with them. His prophetic sternness is a consequence 
 of the intensity of his zeal for the glory of the God of Israel, and of his love for the People 
 of the Lord" (Wordsworth, Intr. Jer., p. xv.). 3. The following general " marks of style" 
 have been indicated (see Smith's Bib. Diet., art. Jeremiah) as characteristic of his prophetic 
 writings, all of which are manifest, some of them very distinctly, in his Lamentations. Re- 
 miniscences and reproductions of what earlier prophets had written. Influences on his mind 
 of the newly discovered law, and especially of the Book of Deuteronomy. A tendency to re- 
 produce himself — to repeat in nearly the same words the great truths which affected his own 
 heart, and which he wished to impress on the hearts of others. Analogies drawn " not from 
 the region of the great and terrible, but from the most homely and familiar incidents (xiii. 1- 
 11 ; xviii. 1-10)." 4. It is a striking peculiarity of Jeremiah, which we find repeated in 
 the Lamentations, that the future deliverance of Israel is set forth under the form of the 
 destruction of their enemies. Thus elegies, i., iii. and iv., end with predictions of the pun- 
 ishment of hostile nations, where we would expect an announcement of deliverance and salva- 
 tion for Israel. Turn now to the prophecies of Jeremiah and read his predictions against Egypt 
 (xlvi.), Phihstia (xlvii.), Moab (xlviii.), Ammon, Edom, Syria, Kedar, Hazor, Ehm (xlix.),and 
 Babylon (L, li.). Do we not recognize the same prophetical spirit, and the same peculiar, 
 characterististic recognition of the heathen nations in their '' typical character, as representa- 
 tives of various kinds of enmity against the church of Christ " (Wordsworth, Intr. Jer., p, 
 xiii.), so that their humiliation or destruction is tantamount to the glory and deliverance of 
 the people of God? 5. Incidental evidences of the identity of the author of Jeremiah's pro- 
 phecies and of the Lamentations, in many minute points of resemblance. — " As in the Prophecies 
 of Jeremiah, so here, the causes of the exile of the people, and of the destruction of Jerusalem 
 and the Temple, are represented to be the vices and crimes of the covenant people (compare i. 
 5, 8, 14, 22 ; iii. 39, 42 ; iv. 6, 22 ; v. 16, with Jer. xiii. 22, 26 ; xiv. 7 : xvi. 10-12 ; xvii. 1-3), 
 their guilty reliance on false prophets and profligate priests (comp. ii. 14 ; iv. 13-15, with Jer. 
 ii. 7, 8 ; v. 31 ; xiv. 13 ; xxiii. 11-40 ; xxvii. etc.), their false confidence of security in Jerusalem 
 (comp. iv. 12, with Jer. vii, 4-15), their vain hope of the assistance of weak and perfidious allies 
 (comp. i. 2, 19; iv. 17, with Jer. ii. 18, 36; xxx, 14; xxxvii. 5-10), Haev. Einl, S. 515" 
 (Keil, Einleitung in A. T., § 127, p. 379). — " In both " (the prophecies of Jeremiah and the 
 Lamentations) " we meet once and again, with the picture of the ' virgin daughter of Zion,' 
 sitting down in her shame and misery (Lam. i. 15; ii. 13; Jer. xiv. 17). In both there is the 
 same vehement outpouring of sorrow. The prophet's eyes flow down with tears (Lam. i. 16; 
 ii. 11 ; iii. 48, 49 ; Jer. ix. 1 ; xiii. 17 ; xiv. 17). There is the same haunting feeling of being 
 surrounded with fears and terrors on every side (Lam. ii. 22 ; Jer. vi. 25 ; xlvi. 5). In both 
 the worst of all the evils is the iniquity of the prophets and priests (Lam. ii. 14; iv. 13 ; Jer. v. 
 30, 31 ; xiv. 13, 14). The sufferer appeals for vengeance to the righteous Judge (Lam. iii. 64- 
 66 ; Jer. xi. 20). He bids the rival nations that exulted in the fall of Jerusalem prepare for a 
 like desolation (Lam. iv. 21; Jer. xlix. 12) " (Smith's Bib. Diet., art. Lamentations). — Besides 
 undeniable repetitions, there are many similarities of thought and structure. There are passages 
 in the Lamentations that seem Jeremiah-like, echoes and suggestions of his prophecies, though 
 we cannot always connect them with any particular utterance of that Prophet. Sometimes, 
 again, the one distinctly and promptly suggests and recalls the others. For example. In Lam. 
 i. 20, " Behold, Lord, for I am in distress ; my bowels are troubled ; mine heart is turned 
 within me," and in Lam. ii. 11, " my bowels are troubled within me, my liver is poured upon 
 the earth," we recognize the man of whom it has been said — with reference to Jer. iv. 19, " My 
 bowels, ray bowels ! I am pained at my very heart ; ray heart raaketh a noise in me " — 
 " through the chambers of his innermost heart there is a shudder " (Ewald, quoted by Stanley). 
 Lam. ii. 14, aside from its verbal similarities, could only have been written by the author of 
 Jer. xxiii. 36-38. The same clarion voice that rung out the cry as if from the ramparts of Baby- 
 lon in Jer. li. 12, is heard resounding from the broken walls of Jerusalem in Lam. ii. 17. He 
 who arrested himself on the very verge of a criminal despair, when he wrote Lam. iii. 18 (see the 
 Commentary), surely had in his mind the words he had before written in Jer. iv. 10 and xx. 7 
 
ADDITIONAL REMARKS ON THE QUESTION OF AUTHORSHIP. 27 
 
 And the author of Lam. iii. 10, — " He was unto me as a bear lying in wait, and as a lion in 
 secret places," — was only in imagination transferring to himself that perilous position, in which 
 he had with grief and horror contemplated " the struggles of the expiring kingdom of Judah, 
 like those of a hunted animal, — now flying, now standing at bay, between two huge beasts of 
 prey, which, whilst their main object is to devour each other, turn aside from time to time to 
 snatch at the smaller victim that has crossed their midway path." 
 
 5. Last of all, and most conclusive as a rebutting argument to Dr. Naegelsbach's assertion, 
 we have the striking verbal analogies between these two books. But now we come into direct 
 collision with Dr. Naegelsbach's assertion, that the language is not the language of Jeremiah. 
 
 It would be a stronger argument to say that Jeremiah did not write Lamentations, because 
 it mtroduces a great many thoughts and ideas not contained in his prophecies, than it is to urge 
 the appearance of new words, or of old words in new combinations, not found in his prophecies. 
 For it is notorious that men of letters have greater command of language than of thoughts, 
 greater versatility in expressing the same thought in different words, than of infusing original 
 ideas into old words. But Dr. Naegelsbach has succeeded in making his argument very im- 
 posing and formidable in appearance at least, by spreading out upon his pages a long list of 
 assumed variations in language between Jeremiah's prophecies and the Lamentations. Only 
 ten verses in the whole book have escaped his acute criticism, the results of which are all dis- 
 played to full advantage. While the patient labor evinced by this minute catalogue is to be 
 commended, the reader will feel that Dr, Naegelsbach might have spared him the almost equal 
 labor of entering into all the details of the work of investigation, by classifying its results under 
 a few general heads. Had he done so, his pages would have presented to the eye at least, a less 
 startling array of facta and instances, — but he himself might have discovered, in the process 
 of generalization, that those facts and instances are more apparent to the eye than they are 
 to the understanding. In reviewing this catalogue we ought, first of all, to remember that great 
 differences in style and language, between two such books as the prophecies of Jeremiah and the 
 Lamentations, even if the productions of one author, were to be expected ; and then, secondly, 
 we should inquire, whether the differences that do exist are such as are compatible, according 
 to the rules of a just criticism, with their being the productions of one author. With 
 regard to the first point, we should observe, that the prophecies, for the most part, have some- 
 what of the character of unpremeditated, extemporaneous effusions, designed to produce an 
 immediate effect on the hearts and consciences of the king, the princes, priests, prophets 
 and people. Therefore they were expressed in the common colloquial words, idioms and phrases 
 of daily life. These prophetical deliverances often assumed the forms and diction of poetry. 
 But it was the poetry of the orator, rather than of the writer. Eloquence always is poetical. 
 This is especially true of oriental eloquence. But its poetry is the expression of impassioned 
 thoughts in language imaginative and ornate, spontaneously and unconsciously falling into har- 
 monious cadences, that with us who speak the English language grow into rhythmical periods, 
 but with the Hebrews passed into parallelisms and regularly constructed sentences, divided by 
 cesuras and accents into parts corresponding more or less accurately in length. Such is the 
 poetry we find in the prophecies of Jeremiah ; touching our hearts by their pathos, as in the 
 weeping Rachel, refusing to be comforted, or in the plaintive cry. Is there no balra in Gilead, no 
 physician there ? or in the outburst of his own grief, when he exclaims, " Oh, that my head 
 were waters, and mine eyes a fountain of tears, that I might weep day and night for the slain 
 of the daughter of my people;" again delighting us with beautiful imagery, as by the heath in 
 the desert, the wayfaring man, the athlete wearied by the footmen before he contends with the 
 horses; or overwhelming us with the grandeur and sublimity of his conceptions, as in chapter 
 fourth, where he depicts " the tokens attesting the forthcoming of the Lord to vengeance. 
 Chaos comes again over the earth. Darkness covers the heavens. The everlasting mountains 
 tremble. Man disappears from below and the birds fly from the darkened air. Cities become 
 ruins, and the fruitful places wildernesses, before the advancing anger of the Lord. Byron's Dark- 
 ness is a faint copy of this picture, — it is an inventory of horrible circumstances, which seem to 
 have been laboriously culled and painfully massed up. Jeremiah performs his task with 
 two or three strokes; but they are strokes of lightning" (Gilfillan : Bards of the Bible). 
 
28 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 Jeremiah's Prophecies contain much real poetry, not only such in virtue of intensity of feeling and 
 vividness of illustrative description, but in virtue of the parallelisms and alternating sentences, 
 which mark Hebrew poetry as distinctly as rhythm and rhyme do English poetry. Even unpoetic 
 translators have felt compelled to give it the external garb of poetry, by marking its periods 
 with Imes, though some, Uke our own lamented Dr. J. Addison Alexander, have ineflfectually 
 protested against ever arraying Hebrew in these modern vestments. But, after all, the poetry 
 of Jeremiah's Prophecies is the production of a Hebrew orator, rather than of a Hebrew writer. 
 The fourth chapter, for instance, from which the description of the coming judgment is taken, 
 was a fervent address to the people, designed to stir them up to repentance. It was a sermon, 
 an exhortation, a prophetic message from God to His Church. Its poetical features were inci- 
 dental to its impassioned style. The same remarks will apply to all the poetical portions of the 
 Book ; and much of the Book is undeniably simply prose, historical or ethical. Throughout he 
 seeks, not poetical, but oratorical effect. He speaks, not as the poet, but as the preacher. Un- 
 like the Prophecies, the Lamentations are in the strictest sense a poem. This poem was com- 
 posed in circumstances very diflFerent from those in which the Prophecies were produced, and for 
 a very different purpose. The prophet-preacher and orator had fulfilled his unsuccessful mission 
 and retired in a measure from public view. He was in exile with that portion of his countrymen 
 who had fled to Egypt. Here he, who had passed the whole of the former part of his life amidst 
 the excitements and agitations of events more critical and important than any that had occurred 
 in the history of the Jews since they entered on possession of the promised land, now in his old 
 age experienced comparative quiet and leisure. There were, it is true, sorrow and suffering 
 enouc'h around him. The fifth chapter of the Lamentations affords hints of these, and the first 
 chapter tells us how "the pursuers overtook them in the straits." Yet life in that Egyptian 
 exile was stagnation compared with the turbulent history of the prophet's former years. The 
 venerable and broken-hearted man had time now for careful composition. He improved the 
 melancholy hours in the production of a lyrical poem, in which his object was, not as in his 
 prophecies, to produce some immediate effect upon his countrymen, but to publish to the world 
 such a description of God's judgments on Israel, as should redound to the glory of God and con- 
 vey lessons of wisdom and piety to the Church in all time to come. Everything in this poem 
 shows premeditation and pains-taking in the execution, such as we might expect of the prophet 
 in the circumstances in which he was placed. He imposed upon himself the most artificial rules 
 then practised by the writers of poetry, either by his own preference, or to adapt his poem to the 
 prevailing tastes of the Hebrew people. The initial letters of the verses were to be alphabeti- 
 cally arranged, and in the middle chapter or song the alphabet was to be thrice repeated by 
 giving the same initial letter to every clause of each verse ; each verse of the first three chapters 
 was to consist of three periods, or members, the fourth chapter of two, and the fifth of one, agree- 
 int' externallv with what Dr. NAEaELSBACH has described, in musical terms, as a crescendo and 
 decrescendo movement ; and each period or member of a verse was to be composed of two parts, 
 clearly marked, both to the mind and ear, by a pause. These were the rules or laws of compo- 
 sition adopted. Yet these artificial restraints were to be so managed that they should not in- 
 terrupt the continuity of thought, prevent harmony of expression, or destroy the unity that 
 should characterize the five songs as the component parts of one perfect poem. To fulfil all these 
 requirements, a careful choice of words and phrases was imperative. Deliberation was necessary 
 at every step. And the Poet must go beyond the resources of his accustomed dialect and habit 
 of speaking and writing, and cull from the whole Hebrew language the words, idioms and ex- 
 pressions that best suited his purpose. The result inevitably was the occurrence in this poem 
 of a phraseology that is nowhere else found, either in the prophecies of the same author, or in 
 any other single Book of the Holy Bible. How could it be otherwise ? We think, therefore, 
 that it ought to be assumed and granted, as a foregone conclusion, that the Lamentations, even 
 if written by Jeremiah, should contain words, phrases, and turns of thought expressed by a no- 
 vel use of words, nowhere produced in his book of prophecies. Granting this, we are next to 
 ask, whether the verbal differences between the prophecies of Jeremiah and the Lamentations 
 are of such a character as to compel us to the decision that they could not be the productions of 
 the same author ? For a full answer to this question, we must refer to the remarks made upon 
 
ADDITIONAL RliMARKS OX THE QUESTION OF AUTHORSHIP. 29 
 
 these verbal diflferences, as they occur, in the following commentary. But a sufficient answer is 
 contained in the statement, that all these differences may be explained, consistently with the 
 presumption that Jeremiah is the author of this book, by a due consideration of the following 
 rules, or laws of construction. In the application of these rules, frequent reference will be made 
 to the poems of Shakspeare compared with his plays. The choice of these poems for this 
 purpose is induced by the fact that Airs. Clark's Concordance to Shakspeare's Flays enables 
 us to detect what is new and peculiar in his poems as compared with his plays. Time has not 
 allowed a full examination of these poems. Oaly some thirty verses of the two larger poems, 
 "Venus and Adonis," and "Tarquin and Lucrece," have been subjected to a rapid investigation. 
 We should not expect as many verbal discrepancies between the plays and poems of Shaks- 
 peare, as may exist between the Prophecies and Lamentations of Jeremiah, for two reasons. 
 The plays of our English poet are so voluminous that they might be expected to exhaust even 
 his vocabulary, while the prophecies of Jeremiah could not possibly call into use all the words 
 and expressions at the command of a writer or speaker of even ordinary fluency. And again, 
 there is less difference between the blank verse of Shakspeare's plays and the rhymed verse 
 of his poetry, than there is between the poetry of the Prophecies and that of the Lamentations. 
 Shakspeare had occasion to employ over and over again in his dramas the very words that must 
 be repeated in his poems : while Jeremiah would need for his Lamentations a diction to a great 
 extent unlike that in which his Prophecies were composed. Yet in the very first stanza of Venus 
 and Adonis, consisting of six lines, there are four instances of words or expressions that do not 
 occur in the plays of the dr&m&tist, purple-colored face, weeping morn, hied, sick-thoughted, and 
 two that occur only once in his plays, rose-cheeked and bold-faced. In the first stanza of Tar(]uin 
 and Lucrece, consistmg of seven lines, there are three instances of words not found in the plays, 
 trustless, lust-breathing, and lightless. With such facts as these before us, we ought to be pre- 
 pared for great novelties in the style and language of the Lamentations. And yet we will find 
 that what Dr. Naegelsbach has so elaborately spread out before us as novelties, may be 
 classified under the following six heads. 
 
 (1). New combinations of words familiar to the writer and occurring with more or less fre- 
 quency in his Prophecies. These seldom involve real differences in language and style, and it is 
 unfair to cite them as such. They are in nearly every instance similarities in the habit of the 
 writer's phraseology, that prove his identity. When we find in Venus and Adonis expressions 
 like these, loaded- satiety, time-beguiling, ashy pale, blue-veined, thick- sighted, or, in Tarquin and 
 Lucrece, silver melting dew, high-pitched, all too timeless, death-boding, do we doubt whether 
 Shakspeare wrote these poems, because these particular combinations of familiar words do not 
 occur in his plays? The rery first specifications of Naegelsbach are of this character, 
 ^^ "^^1 2ind D'U5 '^3^, i. 1. These are, in fact, indications of Jeremiah's authorship. For the 
 writer who used the expression in Jer. li. 13, n'lViX r\3^, full of treasures, would be very likely 
 to say D^ '•0|"^, ft^^^ of people ; and the writer, who was accustomed to the use of 3T in the sense 
 of great (Jer. xli. 1 ; xxxii. 19), would be very likely to follow the phrase D;; ''ri3"i with this 
 other phrase, involving a poetical play upon the word and a pleasant repetition of sound to the 
 ear, D'lJ? Til. great among the nations. To specify J'lO, i. 3, as a peculiarity of style, is a spe- 
 cies of literary trifling unworthy of the name of argument. Any writer might connect so com- 
 mon a preposition with a familiar noun. If Jeremiah did it only once, so Isaiah in all his 
 writings uses this expression once, and only once (xxiv. 22). Besides, ^'liD occurs twenty-one 
 times, scattered throughout the Bible from Genesis to Zechariah. ''?^ "^IX}, i- 5, involves a pe- 
 culiarity of construction as likely to be perpetrated by the writer of Jer. xxii. 22 and xxx. 16, 
 who says OT ■'3K'|, as by any one else. Many of the specifications given by Dr. Naegelsbach 
 lull under this first head, and are, in fact, strong evidences of Jeremiah's authorship. 
 
 (2). A word not occurring in Jeremiah's prophecies (perhaps not in any other Scriptures), 
 simply because the idea it represents does not oi'cur. Thus in i. 1, rntJ/, princess, is the only place 
 in the whole Bible where a princess is distinctly indicated. Hence the word occurs only here 
 Is it fair to put this down as an indication of style? In fact, however, we claim the evidence of 
 
30 INTRODUCTION TO THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 this very word in behalf of the traditional theory. For the word in the plural, iTnty, princesses, 
 was familiar to Jeremiah in the other Scriptures. If he never used it in his prophecies, it was 
 because he had no occasion to do so : but he does use the verb from which it is derived and other 
 derivatives from it ; and so often does the word "^i^, for a prince, ruler, chieftain, or distinguished 
 person, occur in his prophecies, that we should expect the feminine form of that word, Hity, would 
 be most likely to occur to the mind of the author of those prophecies, when, for the first time, he 
 desired to speak of a princess. — The word ^J'""?, province, i. 1, does not occur in the prophecies, 
 because Jeremiah had no occasion to use it in that book. In Venus and Adonis we read for the 
 first time in Shakspeare of a dive dapper, a much more uncommon word in English literature 
 than njno is in Hebrew. — The word 'n^ clieek, i. 2, Jeremiah had no occasion to use in his 
 prophecies. When for the first time he would speak of the cheek, what word should he use, but 
 the only one used by the inspired Scriptures with which he was familiar? See Deut. xviii. 3 ; 
 1 Kings xxii. 24; (2 Chron. xviii. 23) ; Job xvi. 10; Cant. i. 10; v. 13; Is. i. 6; Mic. iv. 14. 
 (The word occurs in thirteen other places, where it seems to mean the jaiv.) This word, 
 therefore, gives all the testimony that can be extracted from it, in favor of Jeremiah, and not 
 against him. 
 
 (3). Forcible expressions that occur in other Scriptures extant in Jeremiah's times, which he, 
 therefore, would not be unlikely to repeat; sometimes indeed they may be intended as quota- 
 tions. — DH^? r?*. there is no comforter, i. 2. See Eccl. iv. 1. If Solomon years before had used 
 the expression and given it currency in the Hebrew language, is it strange that Jeremiah re- 
 peated it ? Or if Solomon was allowed to use it only once in the whole book of Ecclesiastes, 
 without risking his title to the authorship of that book, may not Jeremiah be permitted to use 
 it in only one chapter of all his writings ? Or, if there is any thing in the argument at all, ought 
 we not to conclude that the author of the first chapter of Lamentations could not have written 
 the other chapters, because this unique expression occurs five times in the first chapter and not 
 at all in the others ? — 00^ >^^]'^, became tributary, i. 1. This phrase was familiar to Jeremiah 
 in Gen. xlix. 15 ; Josh. xvi. 10 ; Deut. xx. 11, besides many similar expressions in the old 
 Scriptures. 
 
 (4). Words so familiar to the common dialect of Jeremiah's times, that their use by him can 
 occasion no surprise, though they do not occur in his prophecies. — We find in the Venus and 
 Adonis words like the following, which do not occur in Shakspeaee's plays : saddle bow, toy 
 as a verb, stalled up (he uses the noun stall often, the verb stall only once, but stall up never, a 
 point our German critics would make very emphatic, if discussing the authorship of this poem), 
 unripe, overswayed, overruled in the sense of ruling over another, uncontrolled in the sense of 
 unconquered, dishevelled, spright, souring, disliking as an adjective, etc. Yet who that is ac- 
 quainted with the literature of the times in which the great dramatist lived, discovers any thing 
 remarkable in his use of these words? Neither should it surprise us that Jeremiah has nap- 
 pened not to use many current words in his prophecies, which he has chosen to use in the La- 
 mentations. For example, 'JJ^,. of which we shall speak again. •TiJ^i'., i. 3, which occurs in 
 Ex. twelve, in Lev. five, in Num. thirteen, in 1 Chron. eight, in 2 Chron. three, and in Ez. two 
 times, and once in Gen., in Deut. and in Is. So niJO, i. 3, is found in Gen. viii. 9 ; Deut. xxviii. 
 65 ; Ruth lii. 1 ; 1 Chron. vi. 16 ; Is. xxxiv. 14. 
 
 (5). Slight grammatical variations, licenses allowed every poet; the use of a verb in a 
 tense in which it does not happen to occur in the prophecies ; the use of nouns as adjectives, 
 or vice versa ; and similar peculiarities. — i. 3, nUD instead of nniJD ; ver. 4, the ending 
 V- ; ii. 13, «£)"< construed with S ; ver. 14, Hin without XIC^ ; iii. 6, Hiph. of 133, etc. As 
 well might we question the authorship of Venus and Adonis, because Shakspeare, often as 
 he uses the verb hie, never in his plays has the preterite hied ; nor 'miss for misbehaviour ; nor 
 the participle distilling, though he has distil four times, distilled ten, distillative and disfilment 
 each once; nor the adjective sappy : nor the participle souring : or the authorship of Tarquin 
 *nd Lucrece, because in the plays the adjectives made out of nouns, trustless, lightless, bateless, 
 
•ADDITIONAL REMARKS ON THE QUESTION OF AUTHORSHIP. 31 
 
 do not occur ; nor does the verb stows, though the participle stowed occurs three times ; nor the 
 verb cypher, though the noun does ; nor the noun blur, though the verb does ; nor do the par- 
 ticiples parling, pawning. We must remember, too, that the inflections of Hebrew words, the 
 changes produced by affixes and sufiixes, and the omission or retention of vowel consonants, 
 give a greater variety of grammatical forms than our English words can possibly undergo. 
 
 (6). The exactions of poetry, and especially of the very artificial structure of this poem. — 
 Though the Lamentations may not be strictly rhythmical, yet the sentences are carefully ba- 
 lanced. There is, too, an evident regard to melody in the choice of words, il^^i! and niJO in 
 i. 3, each occurring at the cesura, and both harmonizing with other words in the verse, show 
 that the phraseology was influenced by regard to melodiousness. In spite of the loss of the 
 correct pronunciation of Hebrew, there can be no reasonable doubt of this. Thus we might ac- 
 count for DD1K', iii. 11, by the pleasing alliteration. The necessities of the alphabetical construc- 
 tion sometimes affected the choice of words, as we seem to see in the repetition of vav conversive 
 in iii. 16-18, and of "nJ in vers. 7 and 9. This may account for the abrupt introduction of the 
 bear, y^, in ver. 10, where the lion would have been quite sufficient, if the acrostic had not in- 
 vited the bear to come too. 
 
 If, now, keeping these rules in mind, the following catalogue is carefully examined, there 
 will be found in it little to weaken our confidence in the traditional opinion that Jeremiah wrote 
 the Lamentations, and some things that will strengthen that belief. 
 
 When our fervent popular preacher leaves the pulpit, whence he had been accustomed 
 to address the masses on the passing events of the day, or from which he poured forth in- 
 struction, warning, invective and exhortation adapted to produce immediate effects; and comes, 
 as it were, to recite before a listening world a dirge on the fall of Jerusalem, that has been 
 carefully prepared, according to the most artificial rules of poetry, known and practised in his 
 day, — we expect to see him, not in his " home-costume," but dressed for the occasion,-^we ex- 
 pect, nay we demand, that his poem shall exhibit in its phraseology, as well as in its thoughts, 
 the results of a careful premeditated selection of words and phrases, that may often lie beyond 
 the habit of his customary " unconscious and undesigned " way of speaking and writing. 
 Judged by this rule, even the long list of variations enumerated above, were they all found to 
 be actual evidences of a difi'erence of style, should not appal us or drive us to the conclusion 
 that Jeremiah could not have been the author of Lamentations. But in point of fact, the long 
 catalogue given above contains comparatively few evidences of even verbal difi^erences between 
 the prophecies of Jeremiah and the Book of Lamentations ; and none that may not be ex- 
 plained consistently with the theory that Jeremiah wrote Lamentations. Take out of that 
 catalogue all the ana^ Isyofisva (and Jeremiah's prophecies will show such a list of these, as 
 may raise the question whether their occurrence is not a characteristic of his style ?) ; all the 
 repetitions of the same word or phrase, as there is no comforter ; all the words for which no 
 synonym or equivalent occurs in the prophecies, and where of course the introduction of new 
 words was inevitable, b,s princess, province, cheek; all the combinations of common words into 
 new expressions that any writer of ordinary ability is constantly producing, and that do not 
 really amount to peculiarities of diction, as full of people, great among the nations; and all 
 slight grammatical changes that cannot be regarded as novelties in a writer who uses the same 
 grammatical forms in other words, as the changes effected on words used in the prophecies by 
 number, gender, mood, tense, or the particles attached to them, or the prepositions with which they 
 are construed ; remove all these from the catalogue, which ought to be thus sifted before we can 
 reach the truthful result of our analysis, and we shall find little left on which to rest an argu- 
 ment against the authorship of Jeremiah. What the residuum would be, may be discovered in 
 the twenty-four instances (see p. 13) on which Dr. Naegelsbach has taken his last stand, and 
 which he evidently regards as constituting the strongest evidences in the whole Book that Jere- 
 miah did not write it. These words then claim special attention. If it can be shown that they 
 are not incompatible with the fact of Jeremiah's authorship, it is not likely that any other words 
 or phrases in the whole catalogue are. 'y'''^, appears only twice and then in close connection 
 in Lam. iii. 35, 38. In both instances it seems to designate God (though some, as Blayney, 
 
82 INTRODUCTION TO THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH, 
 
 give it a different sense in ver. 35) ; but it is applied to God as a descriptive title, rather than 
 as a name. God is spoken of as the High One, He is not addressed as such. That the author 
 of Lamentations does not call upon God by this title, by which He is designated in Deut. xxxii. 
 8, and in many of the Psalms, might be claimed as a coincidence between this book and tht; 
 prophecies of Jeremiah. But the argument that Jeremiah would not be likely to apply to God 
 a word he himself uses (xxii. 2 ; xxxvi. 10), and which is so constantly associated with God in 
 the old Scriptures (see Gen. xiv. 18, 19, 20, 22 ; Num. xxiv. 16), and which Jeremiah the pious 
 priest and prophet, must have so often used in the liturgical Psalms (vii. 18; ix. 3; xxi. 8; 
 xlvi. 5, etc.) is too feeble to withstand the first assault. The citation of the next word "J^X, 
 without any allusion to the question of its genuineness, does not seem entirely ingenuous. 
 Certain it is that many MSS., some early editions and some of the older versions have Hiri' in- 
 stead of 'J^X in every one of the fourteen places referred to in the Lamentations. The evidence 
 in favor of this reading is so strong that in every instance Blayney translates Jehovah, and 
 BooTHROYD, in his critical Hebrew Bible, marks 'J^X as a probable corruption. If we consider 
 the reluctance with which the Jews would regard the connection of the name of Jehovah with 
 the judgments befalling themselves, we can imagine that doubts as to the TT,)p] and suggestions 
 of 'J'^?*, may have passed in the course of transcription from the margin into the text. But on 
 the supposition that 'J^X may be the true reading, it is not impossible to reconcile this with 
 Jeremiah's authorship. Though Jeremiah may have preferred to connect with "'J"^8< the name of 
 nirr, yet in this poem the artificial style (see Rule 6, p. 81) requiring short terse sentences 
 may have forbidden his usual habit. Yet for the sake of variety of expression, or afi'ected by 
 that indefinable taste that guides the poet and which we may not be able always to detect in 
 reading a foreign language, especially one the original pronunciation of which is lost, Jeremiah 
 may have preferred to write ""J^^^ alone, instead of TVT}] alone. The likelihood that the choice 
 of this word was influenced by the arbitrary rules of his poem may be inferred from the fact 
 that the word always takes an important accent. Or again, Jeremiah may have been reluctant 
 to connect the covenant name of God, the name associated with promise, grace and favor, with 
 the fierce and destructive judgments that destroyed His own people and His own Temple. The 
 remarks of Wordswoeth on the use of this name in the prophecies give us a sufficient reason, 
 if one is needed, why Jeremiah should depart from his usual custom and omit T^^p\ after 'J^X- 
 " The prophet appears thus to intimate in the Lamentations, that now, in her captivity and hu- 
 miliation, Jerusalem felt the lordship of Jehovah, the God of Israel ; but by reason of her 
 sins, no longer felt that lordship to be exercised by Him as Jehovah, i. e. as the God of His 
 covenanted people, to protect them " (note on Lam. i. 14). The other words need not detain U8 
 long. tD'3n occurs five times. Each time it is emphatic, and three times it is intended to inten- 
 sify the meaning of HXT, i. 11, 12 ; v. 1. It is well chosep for this purpose, nor do the prophe- 
 cies of Jeremiah suggest a word that both in form and sense would have been equally efi"ective 
 in these places. The word itself must have been familiar to Jeremiah and according to Rule 4, 
 p, 30, cannot be regarded as a peculiarity of style It occurs in Genesis three times, Exodus 
 two, Numbers three, 1 Samuel four, 1 Kings three, 2 Kings once, 1 Chronicles once, Job three 
 times, Psalms seventeen, Proverbs once, Isaiah fifteen times, Amos once, Habakkuk five times, 
 and Jonah three. 'J;?. and the verb from which it is derived ru>|. This is not exactly accurate. 
 Jeremiah uses the verb HJj; in its usual meaning of answering frequently, vii- 13, 27 ; xi. 5; 
 xiv, 7; xxiii. 35, hi; xxx. 3; xxv. 17; xlii 4; xliv. 20: and the derivatives from it in that 
 sense, "{jn fourteen times, I^I eleven times. He also uses n^J^ in the intensive sense of shout- 
 ing, xxv. 30; xi, 14. But what is more to our purpose is, that once at least he uses the deri- 
 vation 'V, poor, miserable, xxii. 16, from HJj; in the sense of being bowed-down, oppressed. 
 He thus at least recognizes the root of "^\, and if in only one single verse of his prophecies we 
 find 'Jj;, miserable, shall we be surprised that in only one part of his writings we find 'J^, affiic- 
 iionf Besides, this word also, according to Rule 4, p. 30, cannot be regarded ae a test of au- 
 
ADDITIONAL REMARKS ON THE QUESTION OF AUTHORSHIP. 33 
 
 thorship. See Gen. xvi. 11; xxix. 32; xxxi. 42; xli. 52; Ex. iii. 7, 17; iv. 31 ; Deut. xvi. 3; 
 xxvi. 7 ; Isa. xlviii. 10, and other books of the older Scriptures. Q^'M^, This word may be re- 
 garded as quite characteristic of Jeremiah ; for he uses it in so many of its forms : in Kal pret. 
 ii. 12; fui. xviii. 16; xix. 8; xlix. 17; 1. 13; in Niphal prel. iv. 9; xii. 11; part, xxxiii. 10; 
 in Hiphil^re^. x. 25; fuL xlix. 20. Why then may he not also use it in Kal participle (see 
 Rule 5, p. 31), especially since he had before him the examples of 2 Sam. xiii. 20; Isa. xlix. 8, 
 19 ; liv. 1 ; Ixi. 4 bis, and since his cotemporary Ezekiel twice used this participial form, xxxvi. 
 3,4? (See Rule 4, p. 30). nr. Jeremiah uses the derivative ^U', viii. 18; xx. 18; xxxi. 
 13 ; xlv. 3 ; and was familiar with the verb (Rule 4, p. 30) in Isa. li. 23 ; Job xix. 2 and his co- 
 temporary Zephaniah iii. 18, nJX. See Joel i. 18 ; Ex. ii. 23 ; Prov. xxix. 2, which passages 
 may have been in his mind (see Rule 3, p. 30). See the word also (Rule 4, p. 30) in Isa. xxiv. 
 7 ; Ez. ix. 4 ; xxi. 11 bis, 12. nJT is used three times, the first time as the initial word of li. 7, 
 when the mind of the writer would be going out in search of a suitable word, and not following 
 the unconscious flow of thought and expression ; see Rule 6, p. 31. Having used it once, it 
 would readily occur to him again, when the sense suited ; and it may be observed that the 
 second time it is used, it stands as an initial word, iii. 17, just where an unusual word would be 
 expected, although the initial letter of its root is not there required. How familiar it was to 
 the dialect of his times (Rule 4, p. 30) may be judged from Hosea viii. 3, 5 and its occurrence 
 in many Psalms and in the Chronicles. NtJn here again we have a word first appearing as an 
 initial, i. 8, and once repeated, iii. 39, to which the remarks made on last word will apply. It 
 might be said that i^X^n, which is used in the prophecies, would have afi'orded the proper initial 
 letter. N£?n may have been preferred for its brevity, and as a matter of taste on account of 
 nxan immediately following. Its frequent occurrence in the Pentateuch and its use by Amos 
 and Isaiah would meet the requirements of Rule 4. As there is an acknowledged mistake in 
 the K'thib iii. 39, it is not impossible that the correct reading there is riNDn instead of the 
 accepted K'ri. "lOnD. Jeremiah in his prophecies uses nnon only three times and then in an 
 abstract sense, iii. 19 ; xii. 10 ; xxv, 34. The use of ^0^D in Joel iv. 5 ; Cant. v. 16 ; Hos. ix. 
 6, 16, seems to designate that word as better chosen for the idea meant to be expressed. See 
 Rule 4 above. ^2^, here again we have a word first occurring as an initial ii. 2, where the 
 Poet is deliberately choosing the best and most forcible word for his purpose and not writing un- 
 constrainedly. The Prophet once uses the verb in the Kal, li. 34. May he not then use it in 
 the Piel, when tnai! form is better suited to his purpose, especially since Habakkuk and Isaiah 
 and older writers set him the example ? 
 
 Son id, li. 2, 17. Because Jeremiah once said DHJ xS, xx. 16, and once 'Donj nS, iv. 28 
 are we to assume that he could not twice say Spn K'S ? The argument is not only worthless, 
 it is truthless, for Jeremiah does say, xiii. 14, Vmnx N'S, and xxi. 7, ^bn'_ x'?, besides often using 
 the word Son. We claim this phrase, therefore, as distinctively characteristic of Jeremiah. 
 "'^JJ, dust, ii. 10. Could not Jeremiah repeat a word made classical in Job ii. 12, iBj; ^pilM 
 on'K/N^-S^, and write Qm^~hii ^SJ^ •I'^Jjf^n? See Rule 3, p. 30. But it so happens that Je- 
 remiah in his prophecies has no occasion to use an equivalent word, he does not speak of the 
 dust, and therefore according to Rule 2, p. 29, this is no indication of his habit of speech. 
 ^0^. This word occurs only in Genesis, Job, Psalms, Isaiah, Jonah and Lam. The Niphal 
 form is found only in Lam. ii. 11, the Kal. part, plural, in Gen. xxx. 42, Lam. ii. 19, the Hith- 
 pael in Jon. ii. 8, Lam. ii. 12. We can imagine no valid reason why Jeremiah might not have 
 used it. nm, which occurs twice in ii. 14, is not found in the prophecies of Jeremiah, but it* 
 derivative Y>r\ is, Jer. xiv. 14, xxiii. 16, It is used by Isaiah often, by Amos, Micah, Ha- 
 bakkuk and Ezekiel, and is also found in the Pentateuch, in Job, Psalms and Proverbs. See 
 Rule 4, p. 30. nvi3 occurs twice, ii. 16, iii. 46, both times as an initial word. See Rule 6, p. 
 31, and with the same connecting words. If the word does not occur in the prophecies of 
 3 
 
34 INTRODUCTION TO THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 Jeremiah, neither is the same idea exactly expressed. Hence they contain no equivalent for 
 this expression of opening the mouth against one. See Rule 2, p. 29. We have the same 
 words in Ps. xxii. 14. nV£3 with HiJ is used Gen. iv. 11 ; Deut. xi. 6 ; Num. xvi. 30. See the 
 
 T T V 
 
 word also in Jud. xi. 35, 36 ; Job xxxv. 16 ; Isa. x. 14 ; Ez. ii. 8 ; Ps. Ixvi. 14 ; cxliv. 10, 11. 
 Rule 4, p. 30. '^Ir'n. Jeremiah in his prophecies seems to have had occasion to use a substantive 
 for darkness only three times ; and each time he used a different one, xiii. 16, 73^;^; xxiii. 12, 
 n'7£)X ; ii. 31, n'73^{0. It cannot be said, therefore, that any one of these words was character- 
 
 T--: ' ' t:"-:|- ■' 
 
 istic of his style, but on the contrary, the choice of a new word, so far as the evidence goes, is 
 characteristic of his style. Besides, he uses the verb '^^n, and was familiar with the noun in 
 the sacred Scriptures. See Rule 4. Nor is it improbable, as Naeqelsbach himself suggests, 
 that the words "^ix X"?! ■^jiyn, in Am. v. 18, 20 ; Job xii. 25, were in his mind. See Rule 3, p. 
 30. nJUJ. Jeremiah did not use this word in the prophecies, because he had no occasion to 
 do so. In that book there is no equivalent for it. See Rule 2, p. 29. He found the word 
 ready for him when he wanted it, in Job, Psalms, Isaiah and Habakkuk. See Rule 4. 'T\\ 
 See again Rule 4. 
 
 D'J£) aiyi. This phrase is frequent elsewhere, aa Dr. Naegelsbach allows. See Rule 4. 
 And observe, moreover, how the use of the expression is induced by the poetry. The initial 
 word of the verse, iv. 16, is 'J3^ this is repeated in the second member to mark the parallelism. 
 The whole construction of the verse is verbally artful, and should we grant that the phrase is 
 not idiomatic with Jeremiah, we could still account for his use of it in this particular passage. 
 ioS. This is simply a rare form that might be adopted by Jeremiah, as well as another. 
 See Gen. ix. 26, 27 ; Isa. xliv. 15 ; liii. 8 ; Ps. xxviii. 8. ^ relat. The use of this prefix is 
 characteristic of Ecclesiastes and the Canticles, yet if Solomon was the author of those books, 
 and also of the Proverbs and the seventy- second Psalm, he could at pleasure drop this peculi- 
 arity. Why then may not Jeremiah be allowed to use the abbreviated relative four times in 
 the Lamentations, without impeaching his title to its authorship ? " The occurrence of ityx in 
 Judg. V. 27 casts no suspicion on the genuineness of that verse, though B' is used elsewhere in 
 the Song of Deborah, ver. 7. Nor, on the other hand, does a single ^, where "ij^« is the pre- 
 vailing form, discredit Gen. vi. 3, or Job xix. 29" (Lange's Song of Sol. Introd. I 1, Dr. 
 Green's note). The constant tendency to rhythm, at least the terseness of style, is sufficient 
 for the adoption of a form here, which the less compressed poetry of the Prophecies did not 
 require. The abbreviations 'gan and ^miss both occurring near the beginning of Venus and 
 Adoqis, constitute no ground on which to rest an argument with reference to the author of that 
 poem. See Rule 6, p. 31. Finally, y^P'^ without a suffix. This happens once in the Lamen- 
 tations, iii. 45. The same thing happens elsewhere in the Old Testament sixty-one times, in 
 Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, 1 Samuel, 1 Kings, Psalms, Pro- 
 verbs, Isaiah, Joel, Amos, Micah and Habakkuk ; and Jeremiah himself is once imprudent 
 enough to use ^^pD, vi. 1, without a suffix.— The conclusion to which we are forced, after this 
 too patient examination is, that the phraseology of the Lamentations is beyond all doubt com- 
 patible with the tradition that Jeremiah the Prophet was their author. 
 
 On the other hand, there are striking verbal analogies between the book of the Prophecies of 
 Jeremiah and the Book of Lamentations, sufficient of themselves to convince us, that the two 
 Books are the productions of one author. What has been remarked of Jeremiah's writings gener- 
 ally is found to be true of the Lamentations also, — " his language abounds in Aramaic forms, loses 
 sight of the fine grammatical distinctions of the earlier Hebrews, includes many words not found 
 in its vocabulary (Eichhorn, Einl. in das A. T., III. 121)," (Smith's Bib. Diet., art. Jeremiah). 
 Carl Feiedrich Keil, in his Introduction to the Old Testament, gives us the following speci- 
 mens, by way of example, of characteristic words and phrases common to both books. " ""^IJO 
 3'3Dr3. ii. 22, compare with TaDD liJD, Jer. vi. 25; xx. 3, 10; xlvi. 5; xlix. 29; the frequent use 
 of "131? and 'Pi'T*! l3Cf, ii. 11, 13; iii. 47, 48; iv. 10, compared with Jer. iv. 6, 20; vi. 1, 14; 
 
ADDITIONAL REMARKS ON THE QUESTION OF AUTHORSHIP. 35 
 
 viii. 11, 21 ; xiv. 17 ; xxx. 12, etc. ; D:a nr, or n^'OT nr, i. 16 ; ii. 11, 18 ; iii. 48, 49, compared 
 with Jer. viii. 23; ix. 17 ; xiii. 17 ; xiv. 17. Compare io full such passages as iii. 14, and Jer. 
 XX. 7: iii. 15, and Jer. ix. 14; xxiii. 15: iii, 47, and Jer. xlviii. 43: iii. 52, and Jer. xvi. 16 : 
 iv. 21, and Jer. xxv. 15, 27 : and i. 8, 9, and Jer. xiii. 21, 26. Besides, only a few peculiar words 
 occur as nj5t??J, i. 14 ; 3^jl?;, ii. 1 ; Ontr, iii. 8 ; B'3|, iii. 10 ; nav, iv. 8 ; nSxn, and ^S-njJD, iii. 
 65 ; and peculiar forms of words, as ri3U?D, i. 7 ; D'nno, ii. 14 ; HJIi), ii. 18 ; iii. 49, etc" 
 {Einleit., I 127, S. 379). We need only refer to Dr. Naeqelsbach's own Commentary for 
 abounding evidences of coincidences in the use of language in the two books. He makes inces- 
 sant reference to Jeremiah for the explanation of words and phrases. He often, tod with a 
 generous and honorable frankness that we respect and admire, acknowledges that peculiar words 
 and phrases found in Lamentations, occur also in Jeremiah, and sometimes in no other Hebrew 
 writer. Since, then it is conceded that much of the langua'ge of this book is characteristic of the 
 writings of Jeremiah, and since we have shown above, that words and phrases used in this 
 Book, and not found in Jeremiah's Prophecies, are not so numerous and of such a character as 
 to render it incredible that Jerpmiah wrote this Book, it is not necessary to delay the reader 
 longer, but leave the further devflopuient of this argument to the following Commentary. 
 
 Faierson, N. J., Nov. 1870. 
 
THE 
 
 LAMENTATIONS OF JEEEMIAH. 
 
 Chapter I. 
 
 lAMENTATION OF THE DAUGHTER OF ZION OVER THE RUIN OF JERUSALEM AND JUDAH [OR RATHER, 
 THE LAMENTATION OF THE DAUGHTER OF JERUSALEM OVER THE DESTRUCTION OF THE CITY, THH 
 NATION AND THE TEMPLE. — W. H. H.]. 
 
 [The song is naturally divided into two parts of equal length. Vers, l-ll describe the wretched condition of the city. 
 Vers. 12-22 are, more strictly, the lamentation over this condition. In both sections the speaker is the ideal person of th« 
 genius or daughter of the city, who twice, vers. 9, 11, interrupts the description of the first section, which is given in th» 
 third person, with an outcry of pain uttered in the first person. — W. H. H.] 
 
 I. Vers. 1-11. 
 J< Ver. 1. How sitteth solitary 
 
 The city that was full of people ! 
 She is become as a widow ! 
 
 She that was great among the nations, 
 A Princess over the Provinces, — 
 Is become tributary. 
 3 Ver. 2. Bitterly she weepeth in the night, 
 
 And her tears are [constantly] upon her cheeks. 
 She hath no comforter 
 
 From among all her lovers : 
 All her friends have dealt treacherously with her, 
 They have become her enemies. 
 
 y Ver. 3. Judah is gone into exile, 
 
 From oppression and from heavy bondage. 
 She dwelleth among the heathen : 
 
 She hath not found rest : 
 All her pursuers have overtaken her 
 
 Amidst her straits. 
 
 T Ver. 4. The ways to Zion are mournful 
 
 Because none come to her appointed service*. 
 All her gates are destroyed. 
 
 Her priests sigh : 
 Her virgins are sorrowful : 
 
 And she, herself, — is in bitterness I 
 n Ver. 5. Her adversaries are exalted. 
 Her enemies prosper. 
 For Jehovah hath afflicted her 
 
 For the greatness of her sins. 
 Her young children are gone captives 
 Before the adversary. 
 
 J7 
 
88 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 1 Veb. 6. And departed from the daughter of Zion 
 
 Is all her beauty. 
 Her princes have become like harts 
 
 That find no pasture, 
 And go, without strength. 
 
 Before the pursuer. 
 
 i Veb. 7. Jerusalem remembers, in the days of her tribulation and of her wanderings, 
 All her pleasant things that she had in the days of old. 
 When her people fall by the hand of the adversary 
 
 And there is no helper for her, — 
 Her adversaries behold her — 
 They mock at her Sabbaths ! 
 
 n Ver. 8. Jerusalem has grievously sinned ; 
 Therefore is she become vile. 
 All, who honoured her, despise her, 
 
 For they see her nakedness. 
 Yea, she herself sigheth 
 And turneth backward. 
 Ver. 9. Her filthiness is on her skirts. 
 She considered not her end. 
 Therefore she came down wonderfiillj 
 
 She has no comforter. 
 Behold, O Jehovah, ray affliction. 
 
 For the enemy magnifieth himself. 
 ♦ Ver. 10. His hand has the oppressor stretched out 
 Over all her precious things : 
 For she saw heathen 
 
 Come into her sanctuary : 
 Of whom Thou didst command 
 
 ' That they come not into Thy congregation.* 
 3 Ver. 11. All her people sigh. 
 
 Seeking for bread ; 
 They give their precious things for food 
 
 To sustain life. 
 See, Jehovah, and consider 
 
 How wretched I am become ! 
 
 ANALYSIS. 
 
 The logical construction it preserved, although rendered difficult by the constraint of the alphabetical at' 
 rangement of the verses. From ver. 1 to the last clause of ver. 11, the poet speaks. [^Rather the 
 poet puts this language into the mouth of a third person, who is revealed to us in vers. 9, 11, and 
 still more plainly in the ivhole of the second part, vers. 12-22, as the ideal representative of the ruined 
 city. — W. H. H.] Vers. 1, 2 present to us the ideal person of Jerusalem, sharply defining the con- 
 trast between jvhat she was and what she is now. Ver. (i personifies in like maimer the tribe of Judah. 
 Vers. 4-6 depict the present condition of Jerusalem in ruins, in the midst of which description the ideal 
 person in her grief is introduced ; and also, by way of co7itrast, her successful foe : the forsaken roads 
 of the city, the broken gates, the mourning priests and virgins, the exiled people, and especially the no- 
 bles plunged from splendor into the deepest misery , are the separate features which compose this picture. 
 [The especial subject of this description is not the city, strictly speaking, but Zion, the crown and 
 glory of the city. Around the ideal daughter of Zion all the accessories of the picture are drawn. 
 Jerusalem, herself, is the immediate subject of the following verses. — W. H. H.] Ver. 7 relates agau' 
 to the ideal Jerusalem and informs us hoiv she remembers with pain her former estate, whilst now suf 
 fering bitter mockery from her foes. Vers. 8, 9 declare the cause of the judgment, already indicntfil 
 in ver. 5, namely, the heinous sin of Israel: in consequence of ivhich sin, heathen, ver. 10, had in- 
 truded into the sanctuary of Zion, ivhich was forbidden in the law. Finally, ver. 11, to the last 
 clause, describes the distressing famine of the besieged people. From the last clause of ver. H to th» 
 end of the chapter, the Poet lets Zion herself speak, as she had already done parenthetically in rer. 9, 
 
CHAP. I. 1, 2. 
 
 39 
 
 Vers. 1, 2. 
 
 1 How doth the city sit solitary, that was full of people ! how is she become as a 
 widow ! She that was great among the nations, and princess among the provinces, 
 
 2 how is she become tributary ! She weepeth sore in the night, and her tears are on 
 her cheeks j among all her lovers she hath none to comfort her : all her friends 
 have dealt treacherously with her, they are become her enemies. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL, 
 Ver. 1. — nn3, subst., solitariness, is to be regarded as in the accusative. See iii. 28; Lev. xiii. 46; Jer. xv. 17; xlix. 
 81, ^^3'7, Num. xxiii. 9 ; Mic. vii. 14.— T\3T. The ^— is archaic. See Olsh., gl23. (/. [In 'mt^ also. The paragogic 
 
 TT : • T- • • TT 
 
 ' — was, originally, perhaps, a mark of the genitive, as the corresponding letter in Arabic. Occurs in poetry and in com- 
 pound names, as pIIl~''J/lN. p^2f~07D. Henderson.] The archaic "i— , not infrequent in Jeremiah, x. 17 (K'tib); xxii. 
 23; xlix. 16; li. 13. Yet this particular word occurs only here. — 3"^, great, in the qualitative sense, not merely multus, 
 but also TOOj/was, poteTM, great, powerful, occurs often; Ps. xlviii. 3 ; Is. Ixiii. 1 ; liii. 12; Jer. xli. 1. See D'HSCD 31, et 
 Sim., and HB"^, the metropolis of the Ammonites. The phrase D''VJ3 2'\ occurs only here. [See Intr., Add. Jiem.{l). p. 2',» j— 
 The 3 after ''pl^^^C/ indicates the object over which the Princess rules. See Puerst. [Blatney, Boothroyd, translate ouer, 
 instead of among.}— r\'^V is synonymous with 713*^, ''■S-, DTlStO liJ', Gen. xxxvii. 36 ; xxxix. 1, et al., and D'O'^^D "^t^, 
 
 TT T- .^__^ ...^_ 
 
 Dan. i. 7, 9, et al. are synonymous with <\^ 3'^ and <^ 3"1- The sing. TT^iy e.xcepting as the proper name Sarah, occurs 
 
 ~ ~ T T 
 
 only here. Plural in Judges v. 29; Is. xlix. 23; 1 Kings xi. 3 ; Esth. i. IS, shows that it is an old word and in earlier times 
 peculiar lo puctiy. ^See litir.. Add. Ren. {'Ij. p. 29.] — PU'TO, i"'<'uiinc€, satrapy, iu sing, occurs only in books of Ezra (^ii. 1 j, A c- 
 
 T • : 
 hemiah (i. 3 ; vii. 6 ; xi. 3), Ecclesiastes (v. 7), Daniel (viii. 2 ; xi. 24), and especially Esther (i. 1, 22 ; iii. 12, 14, etc) : in plu. 
 in Esth. i. 3 ; viii. 9 ; ix. 3, 4, 1(1 ; Kz-k xix. 8 ; 1 Kings xx. 14, 1.), 17, 19 {not 2 Kings xx. 19, a mistake of Kuerst copied by 
 Naegelsb.], Eccles. ii. 8. Its usi' in Kzrkid and Kinjjs shows that it was not unknown in the time of Jeronii:ili. [S,;e lutr.. 
 Add. Iiem.{-Z).p.'M.] — [OD. W. Robertson, .^ej^ to fie6. .Bi6., derives from ODD, to mslt, dissolve, " a consuming of strength, 
 
 ~ T 
 
 ri'rium d'.tsnJutio ft cnnfectio" Fuerst. from same verb taken in a secondary signitication, to split, divide, separate, similer, 
 hence metupk. to namhi-r, meisure. distribute. The only evidence of such a secondary signitication of the verb is in the de- 
 rivatives themselves, QQ and HDO- The old quaint idea seems bettei'. "QD from flDO, because it doth melt and dis- 
 solve, as it were, the substance of those who are forced to be tributaries." Gesenics says this is not " tolerable," and derives 
 from ODD to number. But there is a word already from that root, D30, meaning tribute in the strict sense, while DO 
 
 means any sort of tribute-service or hond-service (see crit. notes below), having a sense that cannot be extracted from a verb 
 signifying to number. — W. U. II.] 
 
 Ver. 2. — [n33n 133- The infinitive construct before a finite verb expresses intensity, after it continuity. She weepeth 
 
 sire or sorely, Broughton, E. V., Blayney, Boothroyb, Henderson, or bitterly, Noyes, not continually, as old Eng. vers., Dio- 
 
 :.vTi, French vers., Wordsworth, and Naegelsbach.—W. H. H.]—''nS never occurs in Jeremiah. [See Tnfr., Add. Rem. (2). 
 
 p. 30.]- Jeremiah uses the Piel an J, xvi. 7 ; xxxi. 13 ; but not the phrase DP JD TX, occurring in this chapter four times, 
 
 and elsewhere only in Eccl.iv.l. [See 7n!;r.,jldd.iZem. (3). p. 80.] Jeremiah uses n''3nX xx. 4, 6; ^»1 xxix. 23 ; v. 8; vii. 5, 
 
 "''•■; 1J13 iii. 8, 11, 20; v. 11 ; xii. 6, ete.; 3''j<, frequently, vi. 25; xv. 11 ; xviii.'lf, ete.— DO'i**? VH occurs elsewhere 
 
 -T •• . . . .r 
 
 only in Ps. cxxxix. 22. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 Ver. 1. How, T}D^ii. The second and fourth 
 
 T ■■ 
 
 chapters also begin with this word. It is used 
 by Jeremiah (viii. 8; xlviii. 17), and not seldom 
 in Deuteronomy (i. 12; vii. 17; xii. 30; xviii. 
 21). In Isaiah it occurs once, i. 21, a passage 
 which seems to have been in our Poet's mind. 
 There, as here, the ideal person of Jerusalem, 
 i. e., of the city of Jerusalem (in distinction from 
 the tribe of Judah, to which ver. 3 relates), is the 
 subject. The personification is apparent: 1. 
 From the expression, .■<iis solitary. 2. From the 
 words, as a widoiv. The comparison with a per- 
 son shows that the subject of comparison is re- 
 garded as a person. 3. The singular forms in 
 ver. 2, she weeps, her tears, her cheeks, etc., as cer- 
 tainly indicate a personification, as the plural 
 forms would prove a reference to the concrete 
 multitude of the exiles. The Poet then has in 
 his eye, not, perhaps, the collective person of the 
 exiled people, but the ideal person of the citi/ of 
 Jerusalem, now ruined. This person he sees in 
 
 the spirit, sitting solitary amidst the devastated 
 holy places. — Doth the city sit solitary. 
 Solitary, because she has lost her inhabitants, 
 her children. This is evident from the antithe- 
 sis, — the city that was full of people. [Notes: 
 "There are several Roman coins extant, repre- 
 senting on the one side the emperor Vespasian, 
 and on the other a woman (the daughter of Zion) 
 sitting upon the ground under a palm tree, in a 
 mournful attitude, and having around her a heap 
 of arms, shields, etc. The legend is Jud^a 
 Capta — Judea taken."] — That was full of 
 people ! In regard to sense and construction, 
 see Jer. li. 13; 1 Sam. ii. 5. [Henderson: "It 
 is impossible to determine what was the extent 
 of the population of ancient Jerusalem. Before 
 the revolt under Relioboam it must have been 
 very great, especially during the celebration of 
 the three annual festivals, when the males con- 
 gregated there from all parts of the country : and 
 even after that event, there is reason to believe 
 that, as the metropolis of the southern kingdom, 
 the number of inhabitants was considerable. It 
 not only continued to be the resort of the tribes 
 
40 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 of Judah and Benjamin, but was one of the prin- 
 cipal mercantile cities of the East."] — Hovr. 
 [The repetition of the How in the second and the 
 last clauses of the verse, as in our English ver- 
 sion, is not only unnecessary, but mars the 
 rhythmical construction and interrupts the con- 
 secutive flow of thought. There is no more pro- 
 priety in its repetition in ver. 1, than there would 
 be in ver. 2, which in form and matter is a con- 
 tinuation of ver. 1. The particle, as used in the 
 beginning of the verse, is ejaculatory, not inter- 
 rogative. It rouses and directs attention, with 
 fine poetical effect, to the image of the ideal 
 Jerusalem, once representing a city fuU ofpeoj^le, 
 now seen as a dejected woman, sitting solitary, as 
 in the deepest grief. The attention thus gained, 
 the description goes on to the end of ver. 2, add- 
 ing leature to feature, and circumstance to cir- 
 cumstance, with admirable art and graphic 
 power, till the picture is complete. — W. H. H.] 
 — Is she — she is become as a widow ! In 
 Is. i. 21, the faithful city has become a harlot. 
 Here, where we have a poem not of invective and 
 denunciation, but of lamentation, the populous 
 city has become as a widow. For she is no longer 
 
 (nS;;3) a married one, since she no longer enjoys 
 communion with Jehovah, her Husband (7j;3- 
 See Delitzsch on Isaiah llv. 1 sqq.). She is a 
 wovian forsaken (Is. liv. 6), and the reproach of 
 widowhood (Is. liv. 6) rests upon her. The ex- 
 pression as a widow [njD/Nip, as one forsaken, 
 widowed] implies that Jerusalem has not lost her 
 husband utterly and forever, but she is only se- 
 parated from him for a period. There is in the 
 particle as a foreshadowing of reunion. See the 
 expression as widoius in v. 3. — She that was 
 great among the nations. [Dr. Naegels- 
 bach's punctuation, which is the punctuation 
 also of the Sept., Vulg., and some more modern 
 versions, requires us to connect these words with 
 the preceding declaration. She is become as a 
 widotu, the great one ( Die Grosse) among the na- 
 tions. This is, however, in violation of the ma- 
 soretic punctuation, and does not seem to 
 strengthen the meaning that Dr. N. derives from 
 the expression as a widow. See critical notes be- 
 low. Nor is there a necessary antithesis between 
 being as a widow and having been great among the 
 nations. If we adopt the punctuation of the Sept. 
 and Vulg., we should adopt the translation in full 
 of one or the other of those versions, both of 
 whicli do preserve an antithesis. The Sept. 
 reads She is become as a widow, i. e., a lone, for- 
 saken woman, wAo u-as filled with nations. The 
 Vulg. reads, She the lady of nations became as a 
 widow. The punctuation in our present Hebrew 
 Bibles, which is retained by our English version, 
 Brouohton, Gattaker, Noyes, and Gerlach, 
 certainly makes the sense clearer and thethougbts 
 more copious. The city sits solitary that was full 
 of people! She is become as a widow ! She that 
 was great among the nations. . . . is become tributary. 
 — W. H. H.]— And princess among the pro- 
 vinces. Tliat not only Israelilish, but foreign 
 provinces also, were at times governed by Jeru- 
 salem, is sufficieiitly establislicd in history. [See 
 David's conquests and sovereignty over the neigh- 
 boring states, 2 Sam. viii. 1-4 ; x. G-19 ; the ex- 
 
 tent of Solomon's dominions, 1 Kings iv. 21, 24; 
 
 2 Chron. ix. 23, 24; the power of Judah in the 
 reign of Jehoshaphat, 2 Chron. xvii. 10, 11, and 
 in that of Uzziah, 2 Chron. xxvi. 6-8. See also 
 Ezra iv. 20, " There have been mighty kings also 
 over Jerusalem, which have ruled over all coun- 
 tries beyond the river; and toll, tribute, and 
 custom, was paid unto them." — W. H. H.] — 
 Hov7 is she become — is become. [See remarks 
 on How above.] — Tributary. [-'Obliged to 
 pay tribute-service. This is the common mean- 
 ing of the word." Noyes.] 
 
 '\'\2 n^t!'', sitteth solitary. This cannot meai> 
 
 TT t:|t ^ 
 
 divellrth alone. For the isolated location of the 
 oily could be no misfortune, since contact with 
 liealhea neighbors was forbidden as injurious. 
 (See Num. xxiii. 9; Lev. xx. 24, 26 : Deut. xxxiii. 
 2S ; Ex. xxiii. 31-33; Judg. ii., iii.) Nor can 
 n2^' have the sense of situation, place of location, 
 
 T : It ^ I- J > 
 
 for 3^' never has that sense in the Hebrew. See 
 Gesen., Thes. In Ps. cxxii. 5 ; cxxv. 1 ; Zech. 
 ii. 8 ; xii. 6 ; xiv. 10 it has either the act.ve sig ■ 
 nification oi inhabiting, or the passive of being in- 
 habited (see Jer. xvii. 6, 25 ; xxx. 18 ; 1. 13, 39, 
 et al. ). That this last named passive signification 
 does not suit here is evident from the contiadic- 
 tion involved by the words solitary and as a widow. 
 We can only translate How sits solitary the city. 
 [FuERST, Lex., 'Oiy% to sit, as an expression of 
 being bowed down, struck down and forsaken, 
 with y^ah, Is. iii. 26; Job ii. 13; ^Sy-hv, Is. 
 
 I V T T T T 
 
 xlvii. 1 ; Tja, Lam. i. 1 ; iii. 28 ; DDWn, Ezr. ix. 
 
 3 ; njoSx, Gen. xxxviii. 11 ; Is. xlvii. 8."] 'r^S"}- 
 It is probable that the form ^^^Jjp, in the kindred 
 passage. Is. i. 21, influenced the choice of the 
 form of the word here. — nj07XJD, as a widow. 
 In antithesis to D^ '^3^, full of people, n>^2p. 
 bereaved of children, childless, would be first sug- 
 gested : but this word occurs only once. Is. xlix. 
 
 21. ri/SB?, also, occurs once only (in connection 
 with njoSx), Jer. xviii. 21. H^piT is the bar- 
 ren woman, T\12'^'0 or Pn^^D is abortum faciens, 
 Ex. xxiii. 26; 2 Kings ii. 19, 21, or infaniicida, 
 Ez. xxxvi. 13. njoSx suits admirably, in that 
 it involves the impossibility of bearing children 
 in the future. And that is what the Poet would 
 say. Jerusalem is placed in a condition in which 
 it is impossible for her to become a mother of 
 children, Ps. cxiii. 9. The other feature, that she 
 is also a widow robbed of the children already 
 born to her, is further brought out in what fol- 
 lows. I do not believe, therefore, that Jerusa- 
 lem is here called a widow, because she is be- 
 reaved "of king and princes, and tlie protection 
 and guidance of rulers," as Vitringa and others 
 after liim (lately Engelhardt), appealing to Is. 
 xlvii. 8, have been inclined to think. Besides 
 that, nj07N3 is not synonymous with 'Vh, Raschi 
 has already remarked. Compare DOv at the 
 close of this verse, and njllb. Is. i. 21. The 
 word njO^X is often found in Jeremiah, vii. 6 ; 
 
CHAP. I. 3. 
 
 41 
 
 IV. 8; xviii. 21; xxii. 3. [Henderson is too 
 positive when he says, "The 3 in nj07N3 is 
 simply that of comparison, and is not intended 
 to express any hope that she would be restored 
 from her widowed state, as Jarchi fancifully 
 supposes." Comparison is not assertion: a thing 
 is not what it is compared with. If 2 then does 
 simply indicate a comparison, yet it leaves a pos- 
 sibility, and hence a hope of restoration from a 
 widowed state ; and there is certainly more than 
 a '■fanciful' distinction between being a widow, 
 
 njohxS, and being like one, rUD^N^.— W. H. H.l 
 
 — DO? nn^n, has become tributarg. The expres- 
 sion is found in Genesis (xlix. 15) and in Deute- 
 ronomy (xx. 11) ; and is especially frequent in 1 
 Kings (v. 27, 28; ix. 15, 21) and in Judges (i. 28, 
 30, 33, 35). It is also found in Isaiah (xxxi. 8). 
 The etymology and fundamental meaning are not 
 quite certain. At all the places cited the word 
 Indicates bond-service, or rather, collectively, 
 
 services (see ^^J? DD, Gen. xlix. 15; Josh. xvi. 
 10; 1 Kings ix. 21). It first occurs in the sense 
 of trihutum, a nioneg tax, very late, Esth. x. 1. 
 It is, however, unimportant whether we take the 
 word in our text in the one sense or the other. 
 Nor can we from this word determine the exact 
 period of time, as J. D. Michaelis would do, 
 when he says: "Therefore she is still standing, 
 but has become tributary. This first happened 
 under the Egyptians " (he has here in mind evi- 
 dently 2 Kings xxiii. 33). "To what time then 
 is this to be referred, — to that of the elegy on 
 Josiah, or to that of a later period ?" If Jeru- 
 ealem was no longer standing, and not a human 
 30ul dwelt there, yet the place on which the ruins 
 of Jerusalem remained had become," with the 
 whole land, a part of the territory subjected to 
 the Chaldeans. 
 
 Ver. 2. She weepeth sore in the night. 
 — She weeps and weeps the night throughout. [This 
 translation is beautiful and expository, but for 
 grammatical reasons the E. V. is to be preferred. 
 See the Gramm. Notes. — W. H. H.] The sorrowing 
 widow weeps in the night. Not in the night-time 
 only, in distinction from day-time, — nor, as Ew- 
 jVLD prefers, 'until the night.' For why should 
 ehe not weep during the night also ? Precisely 
 this is the meaning of the poet. She weeps in 
 the night, but not only a part of the night, for 
 
 that were nothing wonderful, but so that her 
 weeping fills up the time which is usually spent 
 
 otherwise. So is H /w3 to be understood in 
 
 T - - 
 
 Num. xiv. 1, "and the people wept that night." 
 See Jer. vi. 5; xxxvi. 30, et al. [Henderson: 
 " To express the more aggravated character of 
 the weeping, it is represented as indulged in 
 even during the night — the period of rest and 
 quiet."] — And her tears are on her cheeks. 
 'Tears,' Jer. viii.23; ix. 17, et al. The absence 
 of a predicate index, which renders the supple- 
 ment of the copula 'are' necessary, gives the 
 idea evidently that the tears on her cheeks are 
 constantly there, have fixed there, as it were, 
 their permanent place. [Henry: "Nothing 
 dries away sooner than a tear, -yet fresh griefs 
 extort fresh tears, so that her cheeks are never 
 free from them."] — Among all her lovers she 
 hath none to comfort her. — She has no com- 
 forter. — [That this phrase has an important 
 meaning is to be inferred by its recurrence four 
 times in this chapter (vers. ii. 9-; xvii. 21; see 
 also ver. 16), and from its being an unusual form, 
 occurring elsewhere only in Eccl. iv. 1. It can 
 have no common-place meaning. It refers indi- 
 rectly to the loss of the Comforter — their God. — 
 W. H. H.] — All her friends have dealt trea- 
 cherously v/ith her, they are become her 
 enemies. The words lovers a,nd friends indicate 
 the human supports on which Jerusalem fool- 
 ishly and presumptuously believed she could 
 rely, especially all those nations whose friend- 
 ship she had so often preferred, instead of trust- 
 ing in Jehovah. See ver. 19; Jer. ii. 13, 18, 33, 
 36, 37; xxii. 20,22; Hos. ii. 7 sqq.; Ezek. xxiii. 
 These places show, in harmony with history, 
 that the nations toward which Israel felt itself 
 drawn in amorous love, but by which at last they 
 were not only deserted, but treated with even po- 
 sitive hostility, were especially Assyria, Babylon 
 and Egypt. With reference to Egypt, see parti- 
 cularly Ezek. xxix. 6, 7, 16. See Ewald in loc. 
 [Henderson : "The^uers 2in& friends were those 
 neighboring states which were allies of the He- 
 brews, — and their idol-gods, which they wor- 
 shipped, and in which they trusted. Egypt 
 especially was the object of their confidence, but 
 not even she durst venture to come to their help 
 against the Chaldeans. Those in the more im- 
 mediate vicinity actually joined the northern 
 enemy on his irruption into the country. 2 
 Kings xxiv. 2."] 
 
 I. 3. 
 
 3 Judah is gone into captivity, because of affliction, and because of great servi- 
 tude ; she dwelleth among the heathen, she findeth no rest : all her persecutors 
 overtook her between the straits. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 3.— nr\7J, see Jer. i. 3.— 'jn, found in Lam. i. 3, 7, 9 ; iii. 1, 19, does not occur in Jeremiah ; yet Isaiah uses it 
 T :|T • t: 
 
 xlviii. 10 : occurs also in Pentateuch ; Gen. xvi. 11 ; xxix. .32 ; xxxi. 42 ; Ex. iii. 7 ; Deut. xvi. 3 ; xxvi. 7, etc.; in Psalms ix. 
 14 ; XXV. 18 ; xxxi. 8, and in otlier writings of earlier origin than Lam.— ^h:^ is found in la. vii. 22 ; xxiv. 22 ; Nali. iii. 4, 
 
 et al.: Jeremiah says ^i^X. xxx. 14, 15, or 313, xiii. 22.— mi^' does not occur in Jeremiah, yet frequently in Penta- 
 
THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEllEMIAil. 
 
 teuch, and in Is. xiv. 3 ; xxxii. 17 ; xxviii. 21.— nUO occurs Gen. viii. 9 ; Deut. xxviii. 65 ; Is. xxxir. 14, is not useill.y 
 Jeremiah : he uses nn^ JO, xlv. 3. [See Inir. AM. R. (4). p. 30. (6). \t. 31.^— Jtyj occurs in Jct. xlii. 16 (see also xxxix. 5 ; lii. 8;.J 
 
 T ~ T 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 3. The tribe of Judah is the subject here, 
 as the city of Jerusalem was in vers. 1, 2, and is 
 conceived of similarly as an ideal person. — 
 Judah is gone into captivity, because of 
 affliction and because of great servitude. 
 Iiito exile is Judah gone from oppression and severe 
 servitude. It has been correctly remarked that 
 from oppression and from hard servitude cannot re- 
 fer to the involuntary exile of Judah, since it is 
 added she findeth no rest. For who may expect 
 rest for a people carried into captivity ? But 
 voluntary fugitives might hope to find rest. Of 
 Buch voluntary exiles, Jeremiah speaks in xl. 11, 
 12, and from Jer. xliii. 4-7 we learn that all these 
 finally agreed together to seek rest in Egypt. 
 Th.at they found 710 rest there exactly agrees with 
 what the prophet had declared, xlii. 13-22, to the 
 people stubbornly persisting in the flight to 
 Egypt. When the Poet speaks here of Judah as 
 a fugitive, seeking rest and finding none, the 
 reason for his doing so may be surmised from the 
 fact that he himself belonged to that part of the 
 people that were living in exile. We may sup- 
 pose, also, that he regarded this part of the na- 
 tion as a representative of the whole nation, be- 
 cause they consisted of people who were at least 
 free. It is much like saying, — Judah isno longer 
 with those who have become mixed with a foreign 
 people as slaves. If it yet survive, it survives in 
 a voluntary exile, where, notwithstanding its 
 distressed state and reduced numbers, it still re- 
 tains at least its personal liberty. [Blayney: 
 "Our translators, who have rendered, Judah is 
 gone into captivity because of affliction 
 and because of great servitude, seem to 
 have adopted the notion of the Chaldee Para- 
 phrast, who represents the Jews to have been 
 carried into captivity in retaliation of their having 
 oppressed the widow and the fatherless among 
 them, and prolonged illegally the bondage of 
 their brethren who had been sold them for 
 slaves." Henderson adopts this view, that Ju- 
 dah is here represented as suffering captivity on 
 account of, or because of her oppressing and 
 cruelly enslaving her own people, see Jer. xxxiv. 
 But the other view, that Judah sought by volun- 
 tary exile to escape the oppression and enslave- 
 ment of the Chaldeans, is recommended by the 
 reasons given above, and is adopted by Blaynby, 
 
 C. B. and J. D. Michaelis, Boothroyd and 
 
 NoYES. HouBiGANT, quoted approvingly by 
 
 Boothroyd in his Ifeb. Bib., connects the words 
 
 "from oppression and hard servitude" with the 
 
 words "she findeth no rest," an obvious and 
 
 awkward attempt to escape the difficulty of the 
 
 supposed causal sense of J'D. Hugh Broughton 
 
 translates Judah leaveth country after affliction and 
 
 much bondage. — W. H. H.] — [She dwelleth 
 
 among the heathen, lit., nations, i. e., the 
 
 heathen nations. The word diuell conveys an idea 
 
 of a settled permanent abode, not required by 
 
 the Hebrew, T\2^\ The German, sitzet, which 
 ' T : IT ' ' 
 
 N AEGEL8BACH uses, is better (see ver. 1 ). The fu- 
 gitive, fleeing before her pursuers, finds at last a 
 place among the heathen, where she sits down in 
 hoped-for security : but in vain ; her pursuers 
 overtake her, as the hart is found by the hunter, 
 in the straits or defiles of the mountain, from 
 which there is no escape. See ver. 6, theg flee like 
 harts before the pursuer. — W. H. H.] — She find- 
 eth no rest: all her persecutors, pursuers, 
 in antithesis to all her lovers and all her friends in 
 ver. 2 (see i. 6; iv. 19; Jer. xv. 15; xvii. 18 ; xx. 
 11) overtook her between the straits. 
 D'^Jfip (Sing, "llfp) occurs, besides here, only Ps. 
 cxvi. 3 ; cxviii. 6. It can mean neither i?A//3ov- 
 Tec (so Sept., which erroneously takes it for a 
 participle), nor termini, dpia/uol (so Chald., Veni- 
 lian Greek, et al.). It means anguslise, narrow 
 defiles from which there is no outlet. The figure 
 is taken from the chase. See the German phrase, 
 "m die Engen treiben," "to drive one into 
 straits." [W.Robertson: "IXD, a streight, or 
 a streightiiig distress." Fuerst: "to take one 
 in the straits, i. e., to get one at last into our 
 power, a proverbial phrase." The present use 
 of the English word straits (as 'reduced to 
 straits,' 'in great straits') explains the sense 
 here, but does not justify the translation, overtook 
 her between the straits. — W. II. H.] The fugitive 
 Judah sits indeed in the midst of a heathenish 
 people, but has found there no rest. She would 
 flee still further, were it possible. But whither 
 could the Jews, with their wives, their children, 
 and all their goods, have fled beyond the desert- 
 surrounded Egypt? They dwelt there, it is true, 
 but they dwelt amidst straits. All their pursuers 
 (and that there were enough of them in Egypt, 
 old and new, is evident from Jer. xliv. 12, 18, 
 26 sqq.) could reach them there. 
 
 I. 4-6. 
 
 The ways of Zion do mourn, because none come to the solemn feasts : all her 
 gates are desolate ; her priests sigh, her virgins are afflicted, and she is in bitter- 
 ness. Her adversaries are the chief, her enemies prosper ; for the Lord hath af- 
 flicted her for the multitude of her transgressions : her children are gone into cap- 
 tivity before the enemy. And from the daughter of Zion all her beauty is de- 
 parted : her princes are become like harts that find no pasture ; and they are gone 
 without strength before the pursuer. 
 
CHAP. I. 4-6. 
 
 4S 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 Ver. 4. — 73X. adj. morumfvH [not desert, waste, devastated, as Fuerst says, which destroys the beautiful personificati n 
 — W. H. H.], occurs Gen. xxxvii. 35 ; Is. Ivii. 18, et ah, never in Jeremiah. The verb 73X he uses, in the same sense as tin- 
 adjective here (iv. 28; xii. 4, 11 ; xiv. 2; xxiii. 10) [and also the noun 72X, vi. 26, et al. — W. H. H.] Isaiah uses the adj.c 
 tive, Ivii. 18 ; Ixi. 23. — ' 73Di see Jer. ii. 15 ; ix. 10, 11. — The expression 'X3 (see Gen. xxiii. 10, 18) is not found in Jeremiali. 
 — ^^10 is found in Jeremiah twice, viii. 7; xlvi. 17, both times in the sense of tempus Jixuin. In the Lamentations the 
 
 word occurs six times, and always in the sense of a time of feast, a festival, i. 4, 1." ; ii. G, 7, 22, or t'lr phu-f of a feast, v. (>. 
 [It may have here tlie sense of an appointed time. Ordinary services in the Temple are neglected. None flock to Zion at i.it; 
 usual times of service. — W. H. H.] — The part. DOIty is not in Jeremiah : he uses the part. Niph., xxxiii. 10, and D0i2^, -Nii- 
 11. The plur. ending V — (see iv. 3, K'tib), is not found in Jeremiah. — The root njN Jeremiah docs not use, either in a 
 verbal or a substantive form (see Lam. i. 8, 11, 21). — HIJIJ, see HJin below. — TO Jeremiah does use, ii. 19; iv. 18. 
 
 Ver. 5. — As shown above, U?K"1 7 VH is a Deuteronomic, y'ltfj a Jeremiac expression. For grammatical form of latter, 
 : T T 
 
 see Olsh., §233, 6. T\1^T\ never occurs in Jeremiah, but frequently in Lamentations, i. 4, 12 ; iii. 32, 33: elsewhere. Is. Ii. 
 
 T 
 
 23; Zeph. iii. 18. [Vulgate derives it from rUH, which sometimes means to speak ; quia Dominus locutus est super earn ; 
 
 T T 
 
 DouAY, because the Lord hath spoki-n against her. But Sept., Syr. and Versions generally derive it from HJ'— W. 11. II.] — 
 3"l-7_y is entirely Jeremiac (see on H'lp, ver. S).—^\^p in Jeremiah only once, v. 6. — 771^,', Jer. xliv. 7 ; SSu', Jer. 
 vi. 11 ; ix. 20. — '311? ^/H is peculiar to this place. '3^ cannot well be an accusative, since to go into exile is always else- 
 where expressed by ^21^3 ^771, see ver. 18. [Henderson: her children are gone captives before the enemy.] — The sing. 
 iy, which is frequent in Lam. (i. 7, 10; ii. 4; iv. 12), never occurs in Jeremiah : he uses only the plural (xxx. 16 ; xlvi. lOj 
 and niy (iv 31 ; vi. 24, et al.). 
 
 Ver. 6. — 10 Ni*\ for forsaken, lost, is peculiar. [Henderson : "For r\3~fD the K'ri and some MSS. read more cor- 
 rectly n3D- The phrase is also thus quoted in the Rabboth." This best suits the rhythm. — ^Y. II. II.] — TTH is never 
 found in Jeremiah ; nor 7''X (yet see TlS'X, xiv. 5) ; nor D^^O (Jeremiah always says J^'J^ID, x. 21 : xxiii. 1 ; xxv. 36). 
 
 We find exprtssions in Jeremiah analogous to niJ K73, ii- H, /'J^V H/S, v. 7, D''n'7X x'73-— 'ITT is found in Jere- 
 miah, but only with suffixes, xv. 15 ; xvii. 18 ; xx. 11. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 These verses contain a description of the pre- 
 sent condition of the city and people of Jerusa- 
 lem [or, a new aspect of their condition is pre- 
 sented. — We have here another of those changes 
 which impart to these poems a highly dramatic 
 character. A third personage is introduced, — 
 " the daughter of Zion." The ideal person here 
 is not that of the city of Jerusalem, formerly in 
 outward splendor and estate a queen among the 
 nations, now fallen and humbled (vers. 1, 2), nor 
 yet that of the tribe of Judah, or of the theocra- 
 tic people, now a fugitive among the heathen (ver. 
 3), — but of Zion, formerly the seat of the theo- 
 cracy, the abode of God, the Temple where Judali 
 and Jerusalem worshipped, now forsaken and 
 despoiled. No longer do the people gather to 
 her appointed solemnities. Silence reigns on 
 Zion, broken only by the sobs of her priests and 
 the moaning of her virgins, a higher evidence 
 than either the ruined city or the exiled people, 
 that the glory was departed from Israel. — 
 W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 4. The ways of Zion, The ivny to Zion, 
 those ways which lead to Zion: not the streets 
 of the city, as Rosenmueller thinks, for the lat- 
 ter are called mvin (see Hos. vii. 1 with vi. 9), 
 do mourn, are mournful (Prosopopoeia, as, e.g., 
 ii. 19; Jer. xiv. 2; xxiii. 10; Am. i. 2), because 
 none come to the solemn feasts, forsaken 
 by those who used to come to her feasts [fjecause there 
 are none coming to her appointed services. Appointed 
 assemblies, including all occasions of stated wor- 
 Kliip, whether daily sacrifices or annual festivals, 
 would more correctly interpret the sense than 
 
 either "feasts," " solemn feasts," or "festivals." 
 — W. H. H.] — All her gates are desolate, de- 
 stroyed. Concerning the city itself, its gates are 
 destroyed. But ruined gates are the sign of a 
 ruined city. ["Destroyed," so N.\egei,sbach, 
 zerstiJrt, Sept. 7'j<pai'tapi:vai=r:xze<l to the gi'ound, 
 Vulg. deslructse. E. V. and modern Versions ge- 
 nerally read desolate. It is the gates of Zion, 
 not the gates of the city of Jerusalem, that are 
 here referred to. Those sacred barriers are re- 
 moved. The holy place has lost its sanctity. It 
 is open now to the intrusion of any who please to 
 enter. See ver. 10: " She hath seen that the heathen 
 entered itifo her sanctuary -whom Thou didst comiaand 
 that they should not enter into Thy congregation.'''' 
 What could more forcibly express, in accordance 
 with Jewish ideas, the idea that the theocratic 
 glory had departed from Israel? — W. H. H.] — 
 Her priests sigh: her virgins are afflicted, 
 sorrouful. Two classes of the inhabitants are 
 named. — the priests and the virgins: the former 
 the nobility, the latter the flower and ornament 
 of the nation. Tlie former sigh under heavy op- 
 pression ; the latter, who formerly rendered 
 every festival attractive, with dances and pas- 
 times (see Jer. xxxi. 13; Herz. Real. Encyc, 
 XV., pp. 414, 415), are now sorrowful. It is 
 thus intimated that every possibility of making 
 a joyous festival is gone. See Jer. vii. 34; xvi. 
 9; xxv. 10; xxxiii. 11; comp. xxx. 19. The 
 Sept. reads, instead of sorrouful, ayauFvai^led 
 away; the translation evidently of nU^np, which 
 either really stood in the text, or was erroneously 
 substituted by the Alexandrian for the I'are word 
 r>U=!J. Ew.^LD follows the Sept. Incorrectly, it 
 seems to me. iTUIJ is sufficiently expressive, if it 
 be taken as an indication of the prevailing grief 
 
44 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 and in antithesis to the indications of the public 
 rejoicings that existed in former times. [The 
 mention of "the priests" particularly shows 
 that the sacred precincts of Zion, where they 
 ministered, and where " the virgins " went up to 
 the solemn feasts with joy and gladness, are be- 
 fore the Poet's eye. To say that the priests are 
 mentioned because they constituted "the nobi- 
 lity" of the inhabitants of the city, is not only 
 awkward, but untrue. Notes translates the last 
 clause Her virgins ivail: a meaning of the origi- 
 nal word not licensed by authority. — W. H. H.] 
 — And she is in bitterness. In these words 
 the whole is summed up. [It is, perhaps, impos- 
 sible to give in English the exquisite force of the 
 original. Naegelsbach nearly reproduces it in 
 German, ''Undihr — ist wehe." — W. H. H.] Here 
 it is evident that the ideal person of Zion is the 
 embodiment of all the particular members and 
 ranks of the community (des volkslebcns). [If 
 this were indisputably evident, it would not mi- 
 litate with the fact that Zion represented the re- 
 ligious life as Judah did the political life of the 
 people. — W. H. H.] — This relative conclusion 
 shows that the Poet proposes to pass to something 
 new. In fact, ver. 4 describes the positive sor- 
 rows and afflictions of the people : ver. 5, a. b., 
 the good fortune of her enemies as the natural 
 reciprocal effect of the misfortunes of Judah ; 
 vers. 5, c, 6, the negative side of the painful 
 experience of the people, namely, the losses they 
 sustained. 
 
 Ver. 5. Her adversaries are the chief, 
 lit., have become the head [/. e., her superiors. 
 Blayney and Noyes : or, the head over her. 
 BooTHROYD.] In Deut. xxviii. 13 a promise is 
 made to Israel, if obedient, "and the Lord shall 
 make thee the head and not the tail," and in 
 same chapter, ver. 44, the reverse is threat- 
 ened, if disobedient. The Poet, without doubt, 
 had these passages in his mind. — Her enemies 
 prosper. The darkness of Israel's sorrows is 
 deepened by the brilliant prosperity of her ene- 
 mies. The expr?s.sion occurs in same sense, Jer. 
 xii. 1. See Ps. cxxii. 6 ; Job xii. 6.— For the 
 LORD hath afflicted her for the multitude 
 of her transgressions. This advantage on the 
 part of their enemies had not happened by 
 chance, nor by mere arbitrariness or unrighteous- 
 ness on the side of God, but by an act of Divine 
 rectitude in the punishment of Israel for their 
 sins. What is professedly made conspicuous in 
 ver. 8 is here anticipated. [Observe, in con- 
 nection with Zion, as the representative of the 
 religious element of the theocratic idea, in dis- 
 tinction from the national, the name Jehovah is 
 first introduced, and the calamities suffered by 
 the people are first distinctly ascribed to tlieir 
 sins; — the sins especially of priests and ministers 
 of religion, and of hypocrisy, formalism and 
 idolatry on the part of liie people. — W. H. II.] — 
 Her children are gone into captivity, her 
 youni/ children are (joiie caplives. Froni here to 
 end of ver. 6 the Poet describes what Judah has 
 
 lost. And first, her children. D'SVi;^ are little 
 children (see ii. 20; iv. 4; Jer. vi. 11; ix. 20). 
 ThcM! are compelled as captives to go forth be- 
 fore the oppressor into fori'ign lands. See Joel 
 iv. 2, 6. — Before the enemy. [The word ad- 
 
 versary (so Broughton) is preferred to enemy, 
 E. v., because the word in Hebrew is the same 
 as that rendered "adversaries" in the first 
 clause. Oppressor and oppressors might be well 
 substituted. — W. H. H.] What renders this more 
 dreadful is the idea that the little children are 
 torn away from parents and brothers and sisters, 
 to be driven as merchandise by their purchasers, 
 some to one place and some to another. [Hen- 
 derson : "In the representations which we find 
 on ancient sculptures nolliing is more affecting 
 tiian to observe females and young children 
 driven as captives before their conquerors." Ob- 
 serve, young childron are mentioned in connection 
 with Zion because they, in a peculiar sense, are 
 the care of the church, of the religious rather 
 than the political rulers, the lambs of the flock 
 entrusted to the spiritual shepherds of Israel. 
 Nothing could more forcibly express, in accord- 
 ance with Jewish ideas, the fact that God had 
 forsaken His people, than that the heathen were 
 suffered, without Divine hindrance, to carry away 
 \.\\QSQyoung children, the children of the covenant, 
 into captivity and slavery. It is this thought that 
 constitutes the poetic climax, showing how se- 
 verely Jehovah afiiicted Zion for her sins. — 
 W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 6. And from the daughter of Zion 
 all her beauty is departed. Zion has lost, 
 not only her dearest and most precious ones, her 
 children, but also her beauty, her glory. This last 
 feature is represented hy the pri7ices, with whom, 
 and before them all, the king is to be classed. 
 [What then was the beauty oi Zion — the King and 
 the Princes, or God Himself? The beauty of Zion 
 was the presence of Jehovah and the maintenance 
 of His worship on the Holy Mount. See Lam. ii. 
 
 1, 6; 1 Sam. iv. 21, 22 ; Ezek. vii. 20-22 ; Ps. 1. 
 
 2, "Out of Zion, the perfection of beauty, God 
 hath shined," Ps. xcvi. 9, "Oh, worship the Lord 
 
 in the beauty of holiness," tyip-r\'2")n3, Ps. 
 cxxxii. 13, 14. The beauty of Zion departed 
 when God forsook His people, suffered the Tem- 
 ple to be destroyed, Jer. lii. 13, and the ordi- 
 nances of worship to be discontinued. The con- 
 dition of her princes, like hunted harts, pursued 
 and overtaken, is the consequence of the destruc- 
 tion of Zion, whence they are driven forth, de- 
 prived of all spiritual nourishment. God is no 
 longer with them. No more are they fed with 
 the bread of Heaven; and therefore, like starved 
 and parched harts, they fall an easy prey to 
 their pursuers. — W. H. H.] — Her princes are 
 become like harts that find no pasture ; 
 and they are gone w^ithout strength be- 
 fore the enemy. These noble and fleet-footed 
 animals lose, by hunger, their strength and the 
 power of flight. They are caught and driven at 
 pleasure. So the princes of Zion, formerly her 
 pride and strength, are driven forth by the pur- 
 suer. The Sept. and Jerome have Kpcoi, arietes, 
 
 — rams. They read or understood D'/ i^. But 
 evidently /"X is the stag or hart (see Deut. xii. 
 l.'j ; xiv. 5 ; XV. 22) : rams would not suit in this 
 connection, since rams do not belong to tliose 
 animals of the chase, which only suffer themselves 
 to be taken by men, when hunger deprives them 
 of power to escape. 
 
CHAP. I. 7. 
 
 45 
 
 I. 7. 
 
 7 Jerusalem remembered in the days of her affliction, and of her miseries, all her 
 pleasant things that she had in the days of old, when her people fell into the hand 
 of the enemy, and none did help her : the adversaries saw her, and did mock at 
 her sabbaths. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 7.— d rT'Ji' 'D' is not the object of r\'\D'- but indicates the time, as is evident from the absence of 1 befor* 
 I . t: T •• : T : |T 
 
 73. The accusative ■'D'' answers, as frequently, the question, When? See my (?r., § 70, (Z. [Blatney : " Houbiqant sup- 
 poses that we ought to read 'O'^ for 'D'' : but I am inclined to think that it is not the 3, but the D, which h.as been sunk 
 before '0% by means of the preceding word having been terminated with the same letter,— a mistake of whicli we find num- 
 berless instances originating from the same cause. '0^0 signifies during the days, or since they began, as DTp 'O'o does 
 
 presently after, m or dwrrng'/ormer days." Boothrotb quotes this note witli approv.al in his Hebrew Bible. Hexdekson 
 says, "in "'0'' there is an ellipsis of 3, of which there are numerous examples." But uouns may be " used absolutely to 
 
 express the relations of time," see Green's Gr., §274, 2.— W. H. H.]— D''n:|1r3, not from Tim, but from TTl, dissipari, va- 
 
 gari (Hos. xii. 1 ; Jer. ii. 31), is vagatio, erratio, vita extorris et erratica ("FrERST). The word is found, besides here and iii 
 19, only at Is. Iviii. 7. [Dr J. A. Alexander translates D^nO D" J>M, the afflicted, the homeless, and remarks, " Lowth's 
 
 version— <7ie wandering poor— ia now commonly regarded as substantially correct. DH^IO is properly an abstract, mean- 
 ing wandering (from l^T), here used for the concrete ivanderers." Accepting the opinion of Lowth and Alexantier, I have 
 put " wanderings " in the text. Fuerst, in his concordance, <lf rives tlic wcinl t'rn'ii '\i, A, as abDVO, but, in his Lexicon, from 
 TIO, and translates it expulsion, persecution, misery. W. Robertson says, " ^^^"13, her mouraings,\iev lamentations, her 
 
 miseries or calamities, or her rebellions, for the word may be referred to the root i:)~l, in Hiph., to mourn, to lament ; or to 
 the root 1"10, to rebel." Blayney says it "comes from TT, to descend from a higher to a lower condition," and so'trans- 
 
 ~T -T 
 
 lates it abatement. The variety of meanings put upon the word is indicated in the following English Versions : BroucxHTOn 
 vexation ; Blayney, ab.isement ; Boothroyd, misery ; Henderson, persecution ; Noyes, oppression. But wanderings is evidently 
 best supported by its use and most natural derivation, and suits the meaning here, but iu iii. 19 it seems to denote simply a 
 
 condition of wretchedness.— W. H. H.]— rf^pnOj only here and ver. 11, K'tib. Neither lOTTD, nor ibnO, found in 
 
 Jeremiah. He uses only mon (iii. 19 ; xii'. li); xxv. 34).— Qnp 'lO'O, in Jeremiah we have DTp^'O'D, xlvi. 26.— 
 
 T'3 could be into the hand [E. V., Blayney, Boothroyd, Henderson, Noyes] instead of by [Broughton] ; the difference is 
 
 not important.— [Blayney : "Instead of D'lX HIXI I propose to read D'^iTI IX"!-" An ingenious, but unnecessary 
 
 ■T T T • • T|- T "" 
 
 unauthorized change. — W. H. H.] 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 7. Jerusalem. [Here occurs another 
 of those sudden changes which give to this poem 
 its highly dramatic character. In the preceding 
 verses, which may be properly regarded as in- 
 troductory to all that follows, the citi/, the nation, 
 and the church have been successively introduced. 
 Now Jerusalem is named for the first time. Jeru- 
 lalem, here, must be regarded as generic and 
 comprehensive; the representative of the theo- 
 cratic idea ; the head of all the cities of Israel, 
 the type of its nationality, lue seat of its wor- 
 ship, where God dwelt in its consecrated Zion. 
 The ideal persons who have already appeared. — 
 the ruined city, pictured as a sorrowing widow 
 and dethroned and conquered queen, of vers. 1, 
 2, — the exile, fleeing from misery and bondage, 
 seeking a home among heathen, but finding no 
 rest, no escape from trouble and persecution, of 
 ver. 3, — the daughter of Zion, despoiled of her 
 beauty, bewailing the absence of worshippers, 
 the invasion of her sacred courts by heathen, the 
 captivity of her infant children and the humi- 
 liation of her proud leaders and princes, of ver.s. 
 4-6, — all now are embraced under the generic 
 name of Jerusalem, which from this verse to 
 the end of the chapter is personified as the repre- 
 sentative of the theocratic idea. — W. H. H.] — 
 remembered, remembers. The unfortunate can- 
 not forbear recalling their former prosperity, 
 the remembrance of which serves both to com- 
 
 I fort them and to increase their sorrow. Zion 
 I follows this propensity of nature. — in the days 
 of her affliction and of her miseries, all 
 her pleasant things. — All the glorious things, 
 of a spiritual and of a temporal nature, which 
 had fallen to the lot of the chosen people from 
 the beginning of their history, are now the sub- 
 ject of painful remembrance. — that she had 
 in the days of old. See ii. 17 ; Is. xxiii. 7 ; 
 xxxvii. 26; Mich. vii. 20. [Broughton: "in 
 the old time." Henderson: "from ancient 
 days."] EwALD regards the words, all the plea- 
 sant things she had from the dags of old, as erro- 
 neously transplanted here out of ver. 10. His 
 principal reason seems to be that they spoil the 
 rhythm. Vaihinger supposes that this verse, as 
 well as ii. 19, contains four members. I see no 
 necessity for this. We are only to regard the 
 two members of the first part of the verse as of 
 greater length. There is apparently no exact 
 measure for the number of syllables of the seve- 
 ral members. The thought that Jerusalem in her 
 misery remembers her prese7it misery [which 
 would be the sense according to Ewald's emen- 
 dation] is unnatural; for niir [to call to mind, to 
 remember] always suggests something distant, 
 remote, in reference to space or time, and, in the 
 latter relation, either past or future. Besides, 
 the words, " that she had in the days of old," so 
 appropriate in ver. 7, would be altogether super- 
 fluous and confusing in ver. 10. — when her 
 people fell into the hand of the enemy, 
 when her people fall by the hand of the oppressor 
 
46 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 This is a more particular description of " the 
 days of her affliction." They were the days 
 when her people fell by the hand of their ene- 
 mies. — and none did help her, and she has 
 no helper. [So all the Eng. Versions, except E. 
 
 v.] the adversaries saw her, her oppressors 
 
 behold her. The constructiim is determined by 
 what precedes, according to acknowledged usage. 
 See my Gr., ^'J9. — [D.'s'i^^ciy ^.te, has here the 
 sense of looking at in the way of inspection, be- 
 holding (Broughton), perhaps in the sense of 
 'looking at a person wiih saiisfaction or joy,' to 
 'feast the eyes upon one with malicious joy ' (see 
 Fuerst's Lci:.). The remark of Dr. J. A. Alex- 
 ander on Is. liii. 2, that HXt ''means to view 
 with pleasure only when followed by the prepo- 
 sition 3," needs qualification. — W. H. H.] — 
 and did mock — they mock — at her Sab- 
 baths. TS^'^iiT^^ is an a;?, ley. The sense of the 
 word itself is clear. It can only m^Au cessationes, 
 excidia [cessations, destructions]. But the 
 choice of a word else unused, seems t/O indicate 
 that the scorn of their enemies was of an equivo- 
 cal character; namely, they scoffed not only be- 
 cause Zion had come to its end, but likewise be- 
 cause now a general Sabbath, a day of rest for 
 the land in a bad sense, had begun. We have 
 then a proof that the Sabbath was to the heathen, 
 even before the days of Rome (see Juv. Sat. XIV. 
 96-106; Pers. V. 179-184; Mart. IV. 4, 7), an 
 occasion for mockery. [Hugh Broughton: 
 " This prophesieth how in Babel they will mourn 
 for desire unto their feasts, which in their Land 
 they would not keep aright. And the Chaldeans 
 will scoff at their Sabbatisms, as did long after 
 Horace, Ovid, and other Poets, — and Tully, 
 too, deserving to have his head cut off and his 
 tongue pricked, as he had. The Ps. cxxxvii. 
 commenteth upon this verse."] This early 
 mockery of the Jewish Sabbath would be more 
 likely to happen, since it would naturally come 
 to the ears of those who destroyed Jerusalem, 
 that the commandment itself predicted to the 
 disobedient people a time of desolation, as an 
 involuntary Sabbath rest of the land. See Lev. 
 xxvi. 34, 43 ; 2 Chron. xxxvi. 21. I believe, 
 therefore, that the old explanation of Vulg., 
 Arab., LniHEE, L. Capelle, translating D"'P3B'D 
 
 by Sabbaths, is right, so far as it allows an equi- 
 vocal sense of this word. [This word has given 
 tlie translators and commentators much trouble. 
 The Sept. translates it by pcrocKeaia, "and 
 mocked at her captivity," deriving the noun 
 from 7131!^, caplivum ducere. The other Versions 
 
 T T •* 
 
 vary. Blayney : ^^discontinuance;" "Houbi- 
 G\Nr justly ob'^erves that riDty is nowhere used 
 for Sabbath, etc. But without taking the liberty 
 which he does of substituting auotiier word, 
 niatJ'D, the use of the verb I^2lif will justify 
 giving to nr\3iyO a sense well suited to the exi- 
 gence of the passage, namely, • her disconti- 
 nuance,' that is, the ceasing, or causing to cease, 
 of her, or of her former prosperity." Booth- 
 ROYD and NoYEs: "destruction." Henderson: 
 "they laughed at her ruin," "n'ri3K/D, lit., 
 
 her ruined circumstances ; the state of the complete 
 cessation of all the active businesses of life. Root, 
 r\2]if to cease; Hiph., to put an end to, cause to 
 cease.''' Broughton: "Sabbatisms ;" (which, as 
 preserving the equivocal sense, is to be pre- 
 ferred). — Blayney : " Some critics have been 
 willing to discard this line. Her oppressors behold 
 her — they mock at her Sabbaths — as well as the 
 fourth in ii. 19, but for no better reason than 
 because all tlie other periods in the two chapters 
 consist of three lines only. But I think this not 
 a sufficient ground, in opposition to the authority 
 of all the Hebrew copies and ancient Versions." 
 Henderson, who makes four lines of this verse, 
 and only three of the others, remarks, "there is 
 no reason to believe that Jeremiah considered 
 himself so rigidly bound to adhere to his triple 
 arrangement, as on no occasion to break through 
 it in order to give utterance to a thought forcibly 
 bearing on the statement which he had just 
 made." Why then adopt an artificial style at 
 all ? But there is no necessity for making four 
 members instead of three of this verse. Each 
 member consists of two distinctly marked clauses ; 
 and in this verse the first member has two clauses 
 of more than usual length. Naegelsbach's ar- 
 rangement of the lines in sixes, instead of trip- 
 lets, plainly disposes of this difficulty, and its 
 correctness is vindicated by the accents. — 
 W. H. H.] 
 
 I. 8-11. 
 
 8 Jerusalem hath grievously sinned ; therefore she is removed : all that honored 
 her, despise her, because they have seen her nakedness ; yea, she sigheth, and 
 
 9 tumeth backward. Her filthiness is in her skirts ; she remembereth not her last 
 end ; therefore she came down wonderfully : she had no comforter. O Lord, be- 
 
 10 hold my afflictions ; for the enemy hath magnified himself. The adversary hath 
 spread out his hand upon all her pleasant things : for she hath seen that the heathen 
 entered into her sanctuary, whom thou didst command that they should not enter 
 
 1 1 into thy congregation. AH her people sigh, they seek bread : they have given 
 their pleasant things for meat to relieve the soul : see, O Lord, and consider ; for 
 I am become vile. 
 
CHAP. I. 8-11. 
 
 47 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 8. — riNDH NCSn. See my (?r., J93, cf, note. The form XCOn (frequent in Deuteronomy, xv. 9 ; xxi. 22, efc, 
 T : |T : •• : ■• 
 
 comp. Is. xxxi. 7 ; liii. 12 ; IIos. xii. 9) is never found in Jeremiah, and in Lam. only here and iii. 39. Jeremiah uses only 
 the form r>X£3n, ^vi. 10, 18 ; xvii. 1, 3 ; xviii. 23, et al. The verb XDH >8 frequent with him, ii. 35 ; iii. 25 ; viii. 14. — 
 
 T - I T T 
 
 [Blatnet : " For PIT J ?! which occurs nowhere else, nineteen MSS., and the first edition of the Hagiographa, read 
 
 TTIJ 7, as at ver. 17 and various other places."] — ^^30, not found in Jeremiah ; 1 Sam. ii. 30; 2 Sam. x. 3; Prov. xiv. 31. — 
 T' : •" - : 
 
 The Hiphil form, 7'Tn (not to be confounded with "^'IH from 7TJ, Is. xlviii. 21), occurs only here. See Olsh., J 255, A, 
 note. In Jer. xv. 19 we find '?7iT, abjectum, vile. [The word is from 77I, Chaldaic inflexion. See Benjamin Davidson, 
 
 "T 
 
 Analyi. Lex., §18, 14; or from 7^1, see Fuerst, Lex. — W. H. H.] — 711"^ J^, not found in Jeremiah. See Is. xlvii. 3; Ezek. 
 
 T : *.• 
 
 xvi. 37. [Cranmer, Bishops' 'B.,JiUhiness ; Broughton, Boothrotd, Notes, shame.] — TIHX is found in Jeremiah only with 
 
 "inT], XV. 6, and J1DJ, xxxviii. 22; xlvi. 5. 
 '- T T 
 
 Ver. 9. — nnXOtD- EWALD, wholly unnecessarily, would read nnXD£3, sJie polluted (3194, 6). The word is not found 
 TT : ■•. T|-: |T 
 
 in Jeremiah. — D'X73. ace. adverbial. See r\1N7£}J, Jobxxxvii. 5; mx*^ij, Ps. Ixv. 6 ; D*"^tJ'^0, Ps. Ixxv. 3 ; my G^., 
 
 1 -t: t:- t 't" 
 
 J 70, k. — 7'njn requires neither 1K?3J nor V3 to complete the sense. The object lies in the verb itself. The direct causa- 
 tive is needed (see my Cfr., § 18, 3). It also means, to play the part of or to affect greatness ; see Jer. xlviii. 26, 42 ; comp. 1 
 Sam. xl. 41. [i'UERST gives this verb an inchoative sense, to grow violent. This sense of the word seems to have induced 
 the inaccurate translation of Blatnet, Behold how an enemy hath aggravated mine affliction. Boothrotd gives same sense. 
 — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 10. — E''^3 (see vers. 13, 17 ; iv. 4) is not strange to the vocabulary of Jeremiah : iv. 31 ; xvi. 7 ; xlviii. 40 ; xlix. 22. 
 
 -T 
 
 — Before 1K3 supply Ti^K- — [Henderson: "The PI in niTIV is merely the fuller form of the pronominal fragment for 
 
 T V-: T ■ ■ 
 
 JT^X, the common form. It is omitted in some MSS."] 
 
 T " 
 
 Ver. 11. — DiT^IDnO) see vers. 7, 10. [Henderson: the form is "quite irregular. It is corrected in the K'ri, which 
 
 rejects the V The word is thus exhibited in a great number of MSS. and in eight printed editions."] — 73i?3. 3 indicates 
 
 something given in the way of price or wages ; see Gen. xxix. 18 ; xxx. 26 ; Is. vii. 23 ; my Gr., § 112, 5, a. 73N is not found 
 
 inJeremiah. Hesays H^DX, xii- 19; or SdXJD. vii. 33 ; xvi. 4; xix.7; xxxiv.20.— t^3J ^'C'llS occurs vers. 16,19; Ruth 
 
 T : T T": |- VT ■ T : 
 
 iv. 15 ; Ps. xix. 8 ; Prov. xxv. 13, never in Jeremiah. — riD'SHI PINT. These two imperatives are found together, only in 
 
 T ' - ; •• : 
 the reverse order, in Job xxxv. 5 ; Is. Ixiii. 15 ; Ps. Ixxx. 15 ; cxlii. 5. In the Lamentations we also have !|X"^1 ^£D'3n, Ter. 
 
 12 ; t3'3n nX'l^, ver. 1, and riD'SH alone iii. 63. Jeremiah never uses the verb £33 J, which Isaiah uses constantly, v. 12, 
 
 30 ; viii. 22 ; xviii. 4 ; xlii. 18 ; Ixiii. 15 ; xx. 5, 6, etc. — 717711 occurs once in Jer. xv. 19. See ni'7''Tni ver. 8. The word is 
 
 T" T 
 
 used in a contemptuous sense ; Zion [Jerusalem] has become a DUJ 3VJ^ (Jer. xxii. 28) when she ought to bo 
 
 D'ij r\1N3V '3y n7nj (Jer. m. 19). [7711 is properly the participle of 7 7T, to s^afce^o and /ro, to toft«r, hence Sgura- 
 . . . . — .|_ .. _^ 
 
 lively to be low, bad, contemptible, abject, mean, and then again figuratively to be miserable, unhappy, in which last sense it is 
 used here. See Fuerst, Lex. — W. H. H.J 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 8. It is sin that has made Jerusalem an 
 object of abhorrence. Her uncleanness has be- 
 come notorious : therefore those who might com- 
 fort her keep far from her, while her heathen 
 oppressors, who, according to the law, should 
 keep away from her, have free access to her. — 
 Jerusalem hath grievously sinned. [Lit., 
 hath sinned a sin. This Hebraism suggests the 
 idea, not only of a sin of a grievous character, 
 but of sin persevered in, and its guilt aggravated 
 by constant repetition. So Cranmer translates: 
 "Jerusalem hath sinned ever more and more." 
 Naegelsbach, poetically, if not accurately: 
 Ges'dndigt, gemndigt hat Jerusalem. Calvin : 
 " Here the Prophet expresses more clearly and 
 strongly what he had briefly referred to, even 
 that all the evils which the Jews suffered pro- 
 ceeded from God's vengeance, and that they were 
 worthy of such a punishment, because they had 
 not lightly ofl'ended, but had heaped up for 
 themselves a dreadful judgment, since they had 
 in all manner of ways abandoned themselves to 
 impiety. This is the substance of what is said." 
 — W. H. H.] — Therefore she is removed. 
 
 [Correctly, therefore she is become vile. West- 
 minster Annotations: "She is become as a 
 woman separated for her uncleanness," Lev. xv. 
 19; Ezek. xxii. 10; xxxvi. 17 ; or, an abominable 
 thing, for so also is the word used in an abstract 
 notion. Lev. xx. 21; 2 Chron. xxix. 6; Ezra ix. 
 11. So ver. 17.— W. H. H.]— All that ho- 
 noured her despise her. Those who formerly 
 honored Jerusalem, her friends and allies, now 
 despise her. [Calvin: "This also did not a 
 little increase the grievousness of her calamity ; 
 she had been repudiated by her friends, by 
 whom she had before been valued and honored. 
 The reason is mentioned."] — Because they 
 have seen her nakedness. By the discovery 
 of her nakedness we are to understand, not 
 merely that after the removal of all protecting 
 covering (e. e., of all means of defence), men 
 could see and even enter into the precincts of 
 her innermost recesses, but especially that in 
 this way the nakedness of Jerusalem, in a moral 
 sense, has become notorious. In reference to 
 her nakedness in this moral sense, Nebuzaradan 
 said (Jer. xl. 3), "because ye have sinned 
 against Jehovah, and have not obeyed His voice, 
 therefore this thing is come upon you." Se« 
 Delitzsch on Is. xlvii. 3: "The nakedness of 
 
48 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 Babylon is her shameful deeds, which are become 
 manifest as such." The same figure of speech 
 is found in Hos. ii. 10; Nah. iii. 5; Ezek. xiii. 
 37. — Yea, she sigheth. [Yea, she herself, or, 
 as for herself she sigheth, etc. — W. H. H.] — 
 And turneth backward. The shame of Je- 
 rusalem is so manifest that she herself cannot 
 deny it. There remains nothing for her to do, 
 but groaning to hide herself. See ver. 13 ; ii. 
 3 ; Ps. ix. 4; xliv. 11 ; Ivi. 10. [The sense 
 seems to be that she herself is so self-convicted 
 and striclien with grief and mortification, that 
 she can only sigli and turn her back upon the 
 spectators in the vain endeavor to hide her 
 shame. This would be very natural in the case 
 of a naked woman, and such is the disagreeable 
 image employed by the poet. Naegelsbach: 
 und wendete sich ziiruck, lit., and turned herself 
 round. The only other sense that can be put 
 upon the phrase is to regard it as expressive of 
 despair. So Calvin, "to turn backward means 
 the same as to be deprived of all hope of resto- 
 ration." But the correctness of such an inter- 
 pretation is far from obvious. The other is 
 more natural and probable. West. Annotations : 
 " Yea, she sigheth and turneth backward for 
 shame; as those in such case would do, that have 
 any shamefacedness, or spark of ingenuity at all 
 in them, see Is. xlvii. 5 : for they seem to swerve 
 here from the genuine sense, who understand 
 the term turning back as intimating a want of 
 power to stand to it, or to rise and recover 
 again, as Jer. xlvi. 5." — W. H. H.] 
 
 HTJ 7, vile. The old translators derive the 
 
 T • ; 
 
 word from l-IJ, vagari, errare, in the sense of 
 agitatio, jactatio facta, i. e., agitata jactata est. 
 Others take it in the sense of HUD (Ps. xliv. 15), 
 that at which men shake the head [as an expres- 
 sion of contemptuous pity. — W. H. II.]. But the 
 connection requires that the word be used in the 
 sense of that which excites abhorrence : for, ac- 
 cording to the following clause, Jerusalem is 
 despised because men now see her nakedness 
 and her uncleanness. Since the lengthening of 
 a syllable, to compensate for the doubling of the 
 following consonant, is not infrequent [see 
 
 ni/'in for n^lvin, next clause, and Green's Gr., 
 
 T • • T ■ • 
 
 § 141, 3. — W. H. H.], we may take T\Ti as ano- 
 ther form of mj (ver. 17). See Ot^sH., ^ 82, c. 
 But mj is that which one avoids, flings away 
 from him as vile, abominates, that which is un- 
 clean, an object of abhorrence, and then the 
 condition [or state, in the abstract] of unclean- 
 ness. It is especially used of the uncleanness of 
 women (Lev. xii. 2; xv. 19, etc.). Here it would 
 denote the person afflicted with such unclean- 
 ness, and become, on that account, an object of 
 abhorrence, as Ezek. xviii. 6 speaks of a nC'X 
 mj. Neither HTJ nor mj occur in Jeremiah. 
 
 T • T • T 
 
 [The authorities for the translation of this word 
 are about equally divided. Those that agree 
 with our author are: the Syr., horror; Ital., a 
 laughing-stock ; Ger., ein unreines Weil> ; Blay- 
 NKY, one set apart for unclean; Henderson, un- 
 clean; NoYEs, vile. On the other hand we have: 
 Sept., Jluctualion; Vulg., instable; Targ., va- 
 
 grant; Cranmer and Bishops' B., therefore she is 
 come in decay; E. V. and Boothroyd, therefore 
 she is removed. Calvin, therefore she is become a 
 wanderer; "the word ought properly to be ap- 
 plied to their exile, when the Jews became un- 
 fixed and vagrants:" to which his English Edi- 
 tor, Piev. John Owen, adds this note, "the re- 
 ference here is evidently to banishment, and not 
 to uncleanness, as some take it, because the noun 
 is sometimes so taken, persons being removed 
 from society on account of uncleanness." Hugh 
 Broughton, thcrifore came she into dispersion, 
 "such uncertainty of place as Cain had. Gen. iv., 
 wandering from place to place." The argument 
 derived from the connection seems to be decisive 
 in favor of the first opinion, therefore is she be- 
 come vile, or abominable, Naegelsbach, zum Ab- 
 schcu.~W. II. II.] 
 
 Ver. 9. Her fllthiness is in her skirts. — 
 Zion [Jerusaleiri] for a long time trifled with sin. 
 She believed the evil she did would not become 
 manifest to her injury. Now it is all become 
 manifest. Her uncleanness has come to the sur- 
 face: it is no longer hidden within her, but it is 
 on her skirts (see Jer. xiii. 22, 26; Nah. iii. 5). 
 [Wordsworth: " It is visible to all ; she cnnnot 
 deny her uncleanness." Calvin refers this to 
 the punishment, rather than the guilt of their 
 sin ; as Lowtu remarks: " she carries the marks 
 of her sins in the greatness of her punishment." 
 The idea of personal uncleanness, however, is 
 stated with such revolting plainness that we can- 
 not fail to see that the very punishment consists 
 in the exposure of her moral pollution. See Jer. 
 ii. 19, 22, 34.— W. H. H.]— She remembereth 
 not her last end. She considered not what 
 the end would be. She did not in the beginning 
 I'oflect what the consequences of her siu must 
 be. [^AssEM. Aiinot. : '^ She remembered not. She 
 considered not, when time was, what the issue of 
 her wicked courses would be, what they would 
 bring her to at last ; see Deut. xxxii. 29. So was 
 it with Babel, Isa. xlvii. 7, and with this people, 
 though forewarned of it, Jer. ii. 25." Calvin 
 understands this to mean, "that the Jews were 
 so overwhelmed with despair, that they did not 
 raise up their thoughts to God's promises; — they 
 were so demented by their sorrow, tliat they be- 
 came stujjified, and entertained no liope as to the 
 future." This interpretation grows out of the 
 view that the first clause refers to the punishment 
 of sin and not to sin itself; and is inconsistent 
 with the apparent sense, with the context and 
 with the ordinary use of the phrase " remem- 
 bering the latter end." — W. H. H.] — Therefore 
 she came down w^onderfully. — Lit. She 
 considered not her latter end, and came down 
 wonderfully. In consequence of her want of 
 consideration she has fallen and is degraded from 
 her high estate. See Deut. xxviii. 43 ; Jer. xlviii. 
 18. — She had — has — no comforter. See ver. 
 2. — O Lord, behold my affliction, for the 
 enemy hath magnified, — doth magnifg — him- 
 self. — A pious ejaculation, which is put in the 
 mouth of Zion [Jerusalem] herself. Jehovah is 
 implored to observe how proudly the enemy, to 
 whom Zion [Jerusalem] is no match, exalts him- 
 self. [liENDERsoN: "After ascribing the fall 
 of Jerusalem to heedless indulgence in sin, by a 
 striking prosopopeia, he introduces her as im- 
 
CHAP. I. 8-11. 
 
 49 
 
 ploring the compassionate regard of Jehovah." 
 See, for a strikingly similar rhetorical construc- 
 tion, Gen. xlix. 18. — The idea in the hist clause, 
 for the enemy magnifies himself, is that the enemy 
 increases his insolence and violence (see gram, 
 note above), he is growing more and more vin- 
 dictive. This may be considered, not only as a 
 reason why Jerusalem utters a cry to God, but 
 as an argument addressed to God for His inter- 
 position. So Calvin represents it : '" The Pro- 
 phet, in order to obtain favor, says, that enemies 
 had greatly exalted themselves. And this deserves 
 a special notice ; for what seems to occasion 
 despair to us, ought, on the contrary, to en- 
 courage us to entertain good hope, that is, when 
 enemies are insolent and carry themselves with 
 great arrogance and insult us. The greater and 
 the less tolerable their pride is, with more con- 
 fidence may we call on God, for the Holy Spirit 
 has not in vain taught us this truth, that God 
 will be propitious to us when enemies thus greatly 
 exalt themselves, that is, when they become be- 
 yond measure proud, and immoderately indulge 
 themselves in every kind of contempt." — W.H.H.] 
 
 Ver. 10. Since Zion [Jerusalem] has not pre- 
 served the sanctuary of her heart from pollution 
 by the enemy of her soul, but has suffered that 
 enemy to rob her of her spiritual treasures, she 
 must not wonder if her earthly enemies desecrate 
 by their presence her earthly sanctuary, and 
 stretch out the hand towards its precious things. 
 — The adversary hath spread out his hand 
 [or rather, stretched it out, (so Fuerst, Nae- 
 GELSBACH, and AssEM. Annol.), as about to seize 
 and appropriate them. — W. H. H.], upon all 
 her pleasant things. Precious, or glorious 
 things. The vessels and treasures of the Temple 
 are intended (see 2 Chron. xxxvi. 10; Jer. lii. 
 17 ff. ), as is evident from the explanatory con- 
 junction for with which the next clause begins: 
 for she hath seen that the heathen entered 
 into her sanctuary, v7hom Thou didst 
 command that they should not enter into 
 Thy congregation. In Deut. xxiii. 2, 3, we 
 tind the command never to allow Ammonites and 
 Moabites to come into the congregation of the 
 Lord. This special command was afterwards ap- 
 plied to all the heathen: Ezek. xliv. 7, 9; Neh. 
 xiii. 3. We are reminded also of the Porch of 
 the heathen, violation of which, according to Jo- 
 sephus (Jewish Wars, VI., 2, 4; comp. Acts xxi. 
 28), was forbidden on pain of death. [Observe 
 ♦,he antithesis between sanctuary and congregation. 
 BooTHROYD expresses this in his translation, in 
 which he says "the sense is given and not the 
 idiom :" Surely she hath seen nations enter into her 
 sanctuary, whom Thou didst forbid to enter even into 
 Thy congregation. Those who were forbidden even 
 to worship with the people, had intruded into the 
 holy place — only priests might enter. "If even 
 their entering to perform an act of worship would 
 have been construed as a violation of the pre- 
 cept, how much more when it had for its ob- 
 ject destruction and spoliation " (Henderson). 
 — W. H. H.] 
 
 [Naegelsbach translates : For she saw heathen 
 who came into her sanctuary. It would be better 
 to translate. For she hath seen how heathen came, 
 etc. 1 have tried to preserve the same form 
 of the verb 1ND in both clauses by making heathen 
 
 the object of one verb and subject of the other. 
 If this is a fault, I share it in company with old 
 Hugh Brouohton and with Blatney. The 
 Cranmkr and Bishops' Bibles give the sense 
 excellently: "Yea, even before her eyes came 
 the heathen in and out of the sanctuary; whom 
 Thou (nevertheless) hast forbidden to come 
 within Thy congregation." — It is difiicult to pre- 
 serve the force of the final word "il, without 
 
 ' T 
 
 putting the clause in quotation marks. The 
 possessive pronoun in the English version " thy 
 congregation " must refer to the people, not to 
 God.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 11. To dreadful spiritual distress is added 
 the greatest bodily want, hunger. The Israelites 
 must part with their jewels in order to procure 
 necessary food. See ver. 19. [All her people 
 sigh. The distress is real and universal. In ver. 4 
 the priests sigh ; in ver. 8 the ideal person, Jeru- 
 salem, sigheth : but here we have, not a poetical 
 image, but the actual groaning of the people, 
 suiferiiig with hunger and searching for food. — • 
 They seek bread, or rather seeking Jor bread. 
 Tills expresses the reason for their sighing. — 
 They have given [they give) their pleasant 
 things [precious things, Broughton, Cranmer, 
 Bishops' Bible, Henderson, Noyes ; Jewels, 
 Naegelsbach, Wordsworth); for meat (food). 
 By precious things are, doubtless, meant those 
 ornaments which oriental women value so high- 
 ly. "A striking illustration of this is given 
 by Mr. Roberts: — 'the people of the East re- 
 tain tiieir little valuables, such as jewels and 
 rich ro!i"s, to the last extremity. To part with 
 that, wliich has perhaps been a kind of heir- 
 loom in the family, is like parting with life. 
 Have they sold the last wreck of their other 
 property; are they on the verge of death? — 
 the emaciated members of the family are called 
 together, and some one undertakes the heart- 
 rending task of proposing such a bracelet, or arm- 
 let, or ear-ring, or the pendant of the forehead, 
 to be sold. For a moment all are silent, till the 
 mother or daughters burst into tears, and then 
 the contending feelings of hunger, and love for 
 their 'pleasant things ' alternately prevail. In 
 general, the conclusion is to pledge, and not to 
 sell their much-loved ornaments; but such is the 
 rapacity of those who have money, and such the 
 extreme penury of those who have once fallen, 
 that they seldom regain them" {Oriental Illus- 
 trations, p. 483). "Under such circumstances, 
 and particularly in times of public calamity, it 
 often happens that jewels and other property of 
 most valuable description, are disposed of for the 
 merest trifle, that a little bread may be obtained 
 to relieve the soul'' [Pictorial Bible, Lon. See also 
 Comp. Comm.).—W. H. H.]— To relieve the 
 soul [marg. E. V., to make the soul to come again']. 
 The meaning is evident from 1 Kings xvii. 21, 
 22 ; 1 Sam. xxx. 12 ; Jud. xv. 19. [To sustain 
 life : lit., to cause the breath, or life to return. 
 " This mode of expression is founded on the ideM, 
 that when one is faint, the breath or life is as it 
 were gone" (Henderson). See Job ii. 4, "all thiit 
 a man hath will he give for his life." — W. H. H] 
 See, O Lord, and consider. See vers. 9, 20 • 
 ii. 10: v. 1; comp. iii. 63; iv. 16. — [Fori am 
 become vile. How wretched I am become. There 
 
5U THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 is certainly, as Hendebson remarks, *' some- | dresa of Jerusalem to Jehovah begins with the 
 thing incongruous in assigning her vileness as a \ last clause of ver. 9, and is continued down to 
 reason why God should regard Jerusalem;" | end of this verse. The appeal to God in the last 
 what is here meant is, as Henderson acknow- clause of ver. 10, which Thou commandest, etc , 
 ledges while he retains the word "vile," " not i and again this prayer to God at the close ver. 11, 
 her moral pollution, but her abject and despised , shows that the whole is addressed to Him : the 
 condition, which was exposed to all around her." l use of the third person instead of the first in the 
 
 Naegelsbach with the last clause of this verse , first two clauses both of ver. 10 and ver. 11, does 
 
 begins an entirely new section. In all that fol- 1 not refute this, as the change from the first to 
 lows, he says, down to ver. 16 Zion herself speaks, j the third person is so frequent in Hebrew de- 
 She entreats first Jehovah, then all passers-by to j scriptive poetry. — W. H. H.] 
 regard her misery. In fact, however, the ad- 1 
 
 PART II. 
 I. 12-22. 
 
 *? Ver. 12. Is it nothing to you, all ye that pass by ? 
 Behold and see 
 If there be any sorrow like unto my sorrow, 
 
 Which is inflicted on me. 
 Wherewith Jehovah hath afflicted me 
 In the day of His fierce anger ! 
 
 Ver. 13. From on high hath He sent fire into my bonee, 
 
 And it subdued them. 
 He hath spread a net for my feet, 
 
 He hath turned me back. 
 He hath made me desolate — 
 
 All the day long sorrowful ! . 
 i Ver. 14. The yoke of my sins is bound fast to His hand. 
 
 They are twined together. 
 They rise up above my neck. 
 
 He hath caused my strength to fail. 
 The Lord hath delivered me into the hands of those 
 
 Whom I cannot resist. 
 D Ver. 15. The Lord hath made despicable all my mighty men 
 
 In the midst of me. 
 He hath proclaimed a set-time against me 
 
 To crush ray young men. 
 The Lord hath trodden the wine-press 
 
 As to the virgin, Judah's daughter, 
 ^ Ver. 16. For these things I weep. 
 
 Mine eye, mine eye — runneth down with water. 
 Because the Comforter — Restorer of my soul — 
 
 I? far from me 
 My children are perishing 
 
 Because the enemy prevails. 
 
 f) Ver. 17. Zion stretches out her hands, 
 
 But there is no Comforter for her. 
 
 Jehovah has given charge concerning Jacob 
 That his neighbors be his enemies. 
 
 Jerusalem has become 
 
 An abomination in the midst of them. 
 
CHAP. I. 12-22. 51 
 
 V Ver. 18. Jehovah — He is righteous : 
 
 For I have disobeyed His commandment. 
 Hear, I pray you, all ye peoples, 
 
 And behold my sorrow. 
 My virgins and ray young men 
 Are gone into captivity, 
 p Ver. 19. I called to my lovers : 
 They deceived me. 
 My priests and my elders 
 
 Expired in the city, 
 For they sought food for themselves 
 To revive their souls. 
 
 *) Ver. 20. Behold, O Jehovah, how I am distressed! 
 
 My bowels are greatly troubled. 
 My heart is turned within me. 
 
 For I have grievously rebelled ; 
 Abroad the sword bereaveth, 
 
 At home — Death ! 
 t^ Ver. 21. They heard that I sigh. 
 
 That I have no Comforter. 
 All my enemies heard of my trouble. 
 
 They rejoiced that Thou hadst done it, 
 That Thou hast brought the day Thou hadst proclaimed. 
 
 But they shall be like me ! 
 n Ver. 22. Let all their wickedness come before Thee ; 
 
 And do unto them 
 As thou hast done unto me 
 
 For all my transgressions : 
 For my sighs are many 
 
 And my heart is faint. 
 
 ANALYSIS. 
 
 From the last clause of verse 11, the Poet lets Zion [Jerusalem] herself speak, as she had done already, 
 parenthetically, in ver. 9. This method of recital continues to the end of the chapter, with a single 
 interruption, ver. 17, where the Poet himself throws in a word. [^There is no necessity for supposing 
 a change of speaker in ver. 17. — W. H. H.] Zwn [^Jerusalem'] invites all who pass by, ver. 12, to 
 convince themselves by their own observation, that there is no sorrow like unto her sorrow ; it streamed 
 as fire through her bones, whilst at the same time a net had caught her feet, ver. 13. She was the vic- 
 tim of sins of her own sowing, in consequence of which she had been helplessly given up to mighty ene- 
 mies, ver. 14 ; her heroes had proved themselves powerless, for her enemies had been called together 
 against Judah as to a feast at the wine-press, ver. 15. It is most natural that Zion's \_Jerusalem' s] 
 tears should flow without ceasing for such calamities, and all the more natural since after the catas- 
 trophe all hope failed her, ver. 16. By way of confirmation the Poet repeats, in his own words, the 
 thoughts expressed by Zion [^Jerusaleni] in the preceding context, ver. 17 : that she stretches forth her 
 hands for help in vain, that the Lord had called together all her foes against her, so that she now 
 stood in the midst of them as an object of abhorrence. Vers. 18-22, Zion [Jerusalem'] speaks again. 
 Once more she repeats, vers. 18, 19, in the way of recapitulation, the acknowledgment of her sin, the 
 invitation to consider her great distress, the description of the principal items of the same, the banish- 
 ment of her efficient youth, the defection of human allies, the pitiable death by starvation of her venera- 
 ble priests and elders. The last three verses are a prayer. May the Lord regard her misery ; the 
 hopeful heart is broken by the blows of the angel of death, ver. 20. May the Lord bring upon her 
 malignant enemies such a day of vengeance as He had brought upon Zion [Jerusalem'], vers. 21, 22. 
 The last two lines o/ ver. 22 are a final exclamation of pain, from which it is evident that thepetitiont 
 offered to the Lord had not availed to allay the deeply-seated agony of mind. 
 
 I. 12. 
 
 12 Is it nothing to you, all ye that pass by? behold, and see if there be any sorrow 
 like unto my sorrow, which is done unto me, wherewith the Lord hath afflicted 
 me in the day of his fierce anger. 
 
52 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 12. — '^IT '"^^U'SD- This phrase is found in ii. 15; Jobxxi. 29; Ps. Ixxx. 13; Ixxxix. 42 ; Prov. ix. 15.— 
 ' ■."." •* : T LL" 
 
 E'^'DN, comp. ver. 18. These words, by brevity and simplicity, are highly poetical.— 17l_;^. The Pual. conj. occurs only 
 here ; the active in ver. 22 ; ii. 20 ; iii. 51 ; Jer. vi. 9 in the sense of racemari [to glean : so Jerome renders it in our text, 
 Wio has gleaned we.— W. II. H.], comp. Jer. xxxviii. 19.— HJin, see riU^l, ver. 1.— '•n DV2- This expression is found only 
 here and Is. xiii. 13. ISX f Hn is an expression common with Jeremiah, iv. 8, 26 ; xxv. Z7, 38 ; xxx. 24 ; xlix. 37. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 12. Zion [Jerusalem] addresses herself 
 now to men, especially to all "passers by," ia 
 order to gain their attention and stir up their 
 sympathy for her sufferings. [This address, 
 according to Naegelsbach, extends to ver. 16, 
 but in fact, to the end of ver. 19, when Jerusa- 
 lem again addresses herself to Jehovah. — W. H. 
 H.]— Is it nothing to you, all ye that pass 
 by ? The Hebrew is very difficult and hardly 
 capable of a satisfactory explanation. It seems 
 to me tliat the only allowable explanation is this: 
 not on yourselves (look), but look and see whether 
 anij sorroiv is as my sorrow. [See crit. note below. 
 There is a difficulty first in deciding whether the 
 first word in the Hebrew is a mere particle of 
 wishing: oh if, oh that, utinam, would that! Or 
 whether it is the particle of negation. If the for- 
 mer, then we may adopt Blayney's translation, 
 " that among you, all ye that pass by, ye 
 would look and see, if there be a sorrow like unto 
 my sorrow," etc. Thus our text is a call for 
 sympathy. But there is little in favor of this in- 
 terpretation. But if the word referred to is a 
 particle of negation, then there are other diffi- 
 culties: is it a simple negative, or a negative of 
 interrogation? In either case, what is the 
 meaning? If it is a simple negative, we may 
 explain it in several ways. 1. We may, as Nae- 
 gelsbach does, connect the negative with the 
 following verbs. Look not on yourselves, but look 
 and see if there be any sorrow like unto my sorrow. 
 Or, 2. We may translate literally, it is 7iot to you, 
 and then we may explain it in two ways : either 
 as an enunciation of the fact that what had be- 
 fallen her had not befallen them; so Hugh 
 Broughton, This hath not befallen you, all that 
 pass by the way. Consider ye and see if, etc.; or 
 it may be taken as a complaint that her sorrows 
 were so slighted — and then the sense is. It is no- 
 thiny to you, i. e., you have no concern in it or 
 care for it. Or, 3. We may translate it in the 
 form of a wish or prayer, 'let not that befall you 
 that hath befallen me.' If we take the word 
 interrogatively, then we may suppose a word 
 omitted, 'Whether or no shall I call upon you,' 
 etc.; or we may render it as the English version 
 has it, and in favor of which we have the weight 
 of authority on the part of translators and com- 
 mentators : Is it nothing to you, all ye that pass by ? 
 West. Annot.: "Do ye make light of mine af- 
 flictions? or, do ye not regard them, and lay 
 them to heart? as complaining that her calami- 
 ties were so slighted by others, and endeavoring 
 to move them to some commiseration of her. See 
 somewliat the like form of speech in the prayer of 
 tliose luily men to God, Xcli. ix. •".2." — Behold 
 and see if there be any sorrow^ like unto 
 
 my sorrovr, \vhich is done unto me. 
 
 West. Annot.: "The manner of persons that sit 
 weeping and wailing, as wandering outcasts, by 
 the wayside, is wont to be no other than is here 
 deciphered, in a proneness to acquaint others 
 with their calamitous condition (so ver. 18), and 
 to aggravate them in relation of them, as being 
 such as had never the like been known or heard 
 of before. See iii. 1 ; iv. 6." — Wherewith 
 the Lord (Jeliovah) hath afflicted me in 
 the day of His fierce anger. See ver. 5. 
 "By the transcendent greatness of mine af- 
 fliction ye may easily perceive that there is a 
 special hand and work of God in it. See Is. x. 
 5." West. Annot.— W. H. H.] 
 
 DD^ 7N Xn. The Sept. reads ol npog viiag, where 
 without doubt we should read ol -irp. h. Vulgate : 
 vos omnes. Chald.: Adjuro vos omnes. Syr., 
 very literally: Nihilne ad vos onmes viatores? 
 Arab.: quotguot viam transilis ! That the Sept. 
 
 read Xw as Nl7 is very probable. There is no- 
 thing that should prevent our pointing it so to- 
 day, if any thing were to be gained by it. But 
 
 O (for which we have NO, 1 Sam. xiv. 30 ; Is. 
 xlviii. 18 ; Ixiii. 19) never stands as a simple in- 
 terjection, but is a conjunction, and always re- 
 quires a verb after it. We could indeed supply 
 such a verb (Oh, that my call might compel your 
 attention, or the like); but it is difficult to sup- 
 ply the right word, and we cannot conceive why 
 the Poet should leave the reader to supply it. If 
 
 we read N17 (which, according to the Masora, 
 
 stands 35 times for iii, see Fuerst), then there 
 are two ways of explaining it. Either it may be 
 understood interrogatively: nonne ad vos? Then 
 N'^pK must be supplied, as Prov. viii. 4 reads, 
 K;^pvX CK^'N DP''7>?.- But there K;^pK is ex- 
 pressed. To supply it here, seems to me, were 
 equally as difficult as the supply of a word after 
 
 Xl7 would necessarily be. Or, Nw mny be un- 
 derstood as a negation. In this sense Aden 
 Ezra and Rosenmueller take it, whilst they 
 
 supply the words "h H^p^ It^X jr'':n, i. e., 
 
 hucusque non tctigit vos, quod mihi acridit ; vus 
 t/iii/'i mala, quiinta nos opprimunt, nondum estis ex- 
 pi-rti. But this explanation is evidently very ar- 
 bitrary. Uy 7N is to be regarded as dependent 
 on ^tO'Sn, which is often construed with /X, Num. 
 
 • T 
 
 xxi. 9; Ps. xxxiv. 6; cii. 20; Is. xxii. 11, etc. 
 This explanation is not, it is true, entirely satis- 
 factory. But may not the forced construction 
 arise from the constraint of the alphabetical ar- 
 rangement of the text ? [See remark above. 
 
CHAP. I. 13-16. 58 
 
 t<l7 here is the same as K/lIi see Fuebst and 1 i mode of expressing the negation «7, which haa 
 Sam. xiv 30. The omission of the interrogation here all the force of a substantive put interroga- 
 
 t tively, as it is in the common version : Is it no- 
 n is accounted for by the desire to employ 7 as thing?" W. H. H.] 
 
 the initial letter. Henderson : " t^l^ is a strong | 
 
 I. 13-16. 
 
 13 From above hath he sent fire into my bones, and it prevaileth against them : he 
 hath spread a net for ray feet ; he hath turned me back ; he hath made me desolate 
 
 14 and faint all the day. The yoke of my transgressions is bound by his hand ; they 
 are wreathed, and come up upon my neck ; he hath made my strength to fall ; the 
 Lord hath delivered me into their hands, from whom I am not able to rise up. 
 
 15 The Lord hath trodden under foot all my mighty men in the midst of me : he 
 hath called an assembly against me to crush my young men : the Lord hath trod- 
 
 16 den the virgin, the daughter of Judah, as in a wine-press. For these things I 
 weep ; mine eye, mine eye runneth down with water, because the comforter that 
 should relieve my soul is far from me ; my children are desolate, because the 
 enemy prevailed. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 13.— OnD occurs often in Jeremiah: xvii. 12, etc.; DiT^D, xxv. 30.— JlinV V, Jer. viii. 1, and elsewhere.— 
 
 T T • T -: 
 
 ni'l'^'l. The word is obscure. It is the Imp. Kal. of mi- But mi signifies to tread upon, gmsem. The subject caa 
 
 TV:- T T T T 
 
 be tyx, since this word is also used as a masculine (Dii 7 U'X, Ps. civ. 4). The singular suflBx 713— refers to TIIDV V, 
 
 since the bones are regarded as constituting one body. See Naegelsb. Gr., ?105, 7, rem. 2. We translate, thererefore, and 
 it subdued them. [Fuebst : n'1 for '•"l"'!, and he caused it (,the fire) to become master. Blatney translates, and hath caused 
 
 it to penetrate into my bones, and says, " This is obviously the right construction, and it is that which is approved by the 
 LXX." But the Sept. uses the verb /caT^yayei/,— and obviously neither that verb nor the Hebrew means to penetrate. All 
 the other versions use the word ' prevail,' ' subdue,' or ' govern,' except Boothrqyd, who blindly follows Blatney. — W. II. H.] 
 mi, Jer. V. 31. Comp. Lev. xxv. 43, 4G, 53.— tJ?"12. See ver. 10. P^/l occurs not again in Lamentations and not at all 
 
 T T - T 
 
 in Jeremiah.— ['J^'tJ^n. The Hiphil form, caused me to turn. This favors the idea of the net as the instrument of prevent- 
 ing escape ; see below.— W. H. H.J—nOOlE'- See ?''DDiK', ver. 4.— HH. This word does not occur in Jeremiah. It is 
 
 T •• I • ■• TT 
 
 fcund, besides here, v. 17 ; Lev. xv. 33 ; xx. 18 ; Is. xxx. 22. 
 
 Ver. 1* — npE'J is air. \ey. The root 10, which reappears in Ip-^, ligare (Gen. xxii. 9), l^-N, IJ'N, Aram. IJX, 
 ligavit (see TTl JS, nodus, Is. Iviii. 6) cat-ena, kettle (observe the change of the aspirate to the sibilant, comp. Js and sus, uAij 
 and silva, vnep and super, iAs and sal, Jl jy and J"1X, Ges. Thes., p. 1318), seems to have the signification of binding, tieing. 
 EWALD conjectures that Iptl* may have been the common technical term for harnessing.— ^i\ frequent in Jeremiah : ii. 
 20 ; V. 5 ; xxviii. 2, 4, 11, 14 ; xxx. 8. In ^7^^ and H^' the Poet seems to aim at a play upon words.— j;^;^ occurs only 
 vers. 5, 14, 22 ; Jer. v. 6.— The Hithpahel JljlE^H only here ; elsewhere only the Pual, Job xl. 7. [Boothroy'd, translating 
 >i!p as if it were iSj^, is compelled to translate UljltJ?" in the sing., His yoke He hath twisted on my neck.— For a similar 
 use of nj^ with ^^', in the sense of rising above the object indicated, see Dent, xxviii. 43.— W. H. H.J- Vu/Dn- Kal fre- 
 quent in Jeremiah; Hiph., labare fecit, Jer. xviii. 15 ; Hoph. Jer. xviii. 23.— "T^. Construction as in Jer. ii. 8. See my 
 Gr., 1 65, 2, /. ["A noun is sometimes put in the construct before a succeeding clause with which it is already connected,"— 
 
 " particularly when the relation is itself omitted, nSi:?r\-T'3, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send" (Green's Gr.). 
 
 T : • : 
 
 This construction renders it necessary to take Q^p in a transitive sense ; or else to introduce a word besides the relative; so 
 
 E. v.: from whom lam not able to rise up. Noyes : against whom I cannot stand up. Whom I cannot withstand or resist. 
 This seems to be the sense, and is not foreign to the use of Dip. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 15.— nbp- Piel only here: Kal, Ps. cxix. 118 : Pual, Job xxviii. 16, 17.— ■)''3X, often in Jeremiah, viii. 16; xlvi. 
 
 15; xlvii. 3 ; 1. 11. In Lam. only here.— IJ^io Nip, Lev. xxiii. 4. See ver. 4. Jeremiah generally uses the noun in the 
 
 tI t 
 
 sense of tempusflnum [and that is its meaning here. Owen : He hath brought on me the fixed time to destroy my young men.— 
 W. H. H.]— 'T^ini "^^yI- ^ peculiar expression, yet see Jer. 11. 22.— ^7 j-\J Ty\. A peculiar use of S [it seems to mean 
 with relation to, as to, quoad.— W. H. H.]. nj, not in Jeremiah, yet he uses 111 of the treaders of the wine-press, xxv. 30 ; 
 xlviii. 33; Ii. 33.— j^3 il7in3, in Jeremiah once, of the Egyptians, xlvi. 11, and once in the connection ''BV nS r\Sin3, 
 xiv. 17 ; comp. xviii. 13 ; xxxi. 4, 21. In Lam., besides here, only in ii. 13, comp. ii. 10. ' 
 
 Ver. 16.— n'3i3 (see pflb, Is. xvii. 6 and elsewhere ; Olsh., § 177, 6) occurs only here. Yet Jeremiah uses Ti23, xli. 
 <;. and n33p, xxxi. 15 : in the last place in connection with SjT, as here : elsewhere T\22 is constructed with ace. viii. 23, 
 
54 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 S, xxiJ- 10, or 03D. x'"- 17- [Gbebn, <?r., §209, 1, and Pauli, Anal., p. 261, attribute the form to the fact that ' was ori 
 
 ginally the last radical of the verb. Pauli, in his Key. p. 63, n, informs us that " the Prophet uses the feminine gender for 
 the purpose of expressing meekness and the intensity of his grief" A ratlier reraarlcable instance of a rule made to meet a 
 supposed case. Fortunately we are not obliged to allow the Prophet to vinsex himself, since not the Prophet himself, but the 
 ideal and feminine Jerusalem is the speaker.— The verb, properly intransitive, is used in a transitive sense : my eye runs 
 
 down water. A peculiar Hebrew idiom to express abundance, Joel iv. 18, 370 ilJD'^n, the hills shall run milk. See 
 
 T T T . ~ : 
 
 Green's Gr.—W. H. U.]— The part. DPi'D Jeremiah does uot use.— D'OpiE?, see ver i — 13J is found Jer. ix. 2. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Vers. 13-16 contain a particular account of 
 the various sufiFerings endured, together with 
 their eflBcient causes. 
 
 Ver. 13. The sufferings [of the city] appear 
 under two images. The first image is derived 
 from the fire that falls from Heaven (Gen. xix. 
 24; Deut. xxix. 23 ; Ps. xi. 6). Heavenly fire 
 burns more fiercely than earthly ; it cannot be 
 quenched. [The image of fire is suggested by 
 the last words of the preceding verse, "in the 
 day of his fierce anger," which may be rendered 
 in the day of His glowing or burning anger. So 
 Calvin, in die excandescentise irse suse. — From 
 above, lit., from on high. Calvin: "the ex- 
 pression is emphatical, for the Prophet means 
 that it was no common or human burning; be- 
 cause what is ascribed to God exceeds what is 
 human or earthly." — Hath he sent fire into 
 my bones. Calvin: ''They who interpret 
 bones of fortified places, weaken the meaning of 
 the Prophet. I take bones in their proper sense, 
 as though it were said, that God's fire had pene- 
 trated into the inmost parts. This way of speak- 
 ing often occurs in Scripture. — David deplored 
 that his bones were vexed or troubled, Ps. vi. 2. 
 And Hezekiah said in his song, "As a lion he 
 hath broken my bones," Is. xxxviii. 13." — W. 
 H. H.]— And it prevaileth against them. 
 Atid it hath subdued them, or got the better of 
 them. [Calvin: "The Prophet says that fire 
 had been sent by God, ivhich ruled in his hones, — 
 that is, which not only burnt the skin and the 
 flesh, but also consumed the bones." The Cran- 
 MEK and Bishops' Bibles translate very freely, 
 but preserve the sense, " From above hath He 
 sent down fire into my bones, and it burneth them 
 cruelly.''' — W. H. H.] — The second image is de- 
 rived from the hunter, who lays nets for the wild 
 beast. — He hath spread a net for my feet. 
 [Calvin: " There is another similitude added, 
 that God had spread a net before her feet, — and 
 thus He had taken away every means of escape. 
 She had been ensnared by God's judgments, so 
 that she was bound over to ruin, as though she 
 had fallen into toils or snares."] — He hath 
 turned me back. See ver. 8. This and the 
 two following clauses contain ideas by means of 
 which the poet seems to puss over from the image 
 to the reality. [But is not this clause to be ex- 
 plained by the metaphor of the net, by which, 
 when she sought to escape, she was turned 
 back? So Calvin understands it: "She had 
 been turned back by the nets of God." Or we 
 may explain it consistently with the metaphor, 
 as the Westminster Annotations ilo : "Cast 
 me down backward ; thrown me down and I lid 
 me on my back."' — He hath made me deso- 
 late, and faint all the day : or, better, i-vr- 
 rowful all the day : so Naegelsbacu and Calvin. 
 
 Cranmer's B. and Bishops' B. both render it, 
 " He hath made me desolate, so thai 1 must ever 
 be mourning." Calvin : " It is stated in the 
 third place, that she was desolate all the day, so 
 that she sorrowed perpetually." — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 14. A third metaphor, which indicates 
 the cause of the ruin which has befallen Zion 
 [Jerusalem]. — The yoke of my transgres- 
 sions is bound by His hand, to His hand. 
 Zion [Jerusalem] may not be relieved from her 
 guilt, but rather it is tied fast upon her as a 
 yoke. And truly this is done by God's hand. 
 But what God binds, that He holds fast; no 
 mortal power can loosen it [Henderson: "The 
 next metaphor is taken from agricultural life. 
 As the hand of the ploughman firmly binds the 
 yoke on the neck of the ox, so inseparably had 
 the punishment of the iniquities of Jerusalem 
 been connected with her rebellious conduct to- 
 wards Jehovah." — There is some uncertainty as 
 to the verb in this clause. In the Keri or Maso- 
 retic reading and in several MSS. and printed 
 editions of the Bible, the verb used means to be 
 watched: and the verb is taken in the sense of 
 watching in the Sept., Syr. and Vulgate, and the 
 old versions generally. It is singular that Nae- 
 GELSBACH docs not refer to this reading, since it 
 is the one adopted in the text of the German 
 Bible. Dr. Blayney and the Rev. John Owen, 
 insist that this is the correct reading. All the 
 versions and translators adopting this reading, 
 except the Vulgate, take the word rendered yoke 
 not as a noun, but as a preposition. Mr. Owen 
 translates thus: He katn watched over my trans- 
 gressions, by His hand they are twined. This gives 
 a good sense. " To ' watch over transgressions,' 
 is similar to 'watch upon (or over) the evil ' in 
 Dan. ix. 14; it is to watch over them in order to 
 punish them" (J. Owen). But the grammatical 
 objections to this rendering are nearly insupera- 
 ble. See Crit. Note below. — Another point of in- 
 terest is whether we should translate by His 
 Hand, or in, or to His hand. The former is adopt- 
 ed by Naegelsbach, Henderson and Booth- 
 ROYD, and has the sanction of the English Ver- 
 sion. The latter in His ha7id, is supported by 
 Sept., Vulg., Bishops' Bible, Calvin, Blayney, 
 and No YES, and is recommended by the sense, 
 and also best expresses the primitive sense of the 
 preposition. The Bishops' Bible reads, ^/^eyfA^ 
 of my transgressions is bound fast to His hand; and 
 appends this note, "The bondage through sin is 
 mo.st grievous, which therefore is called the yoke 
 of sins, fastened in or to God's hand because by 
 no means it can be shaken off or remitted, but 
 only of God's grace and mercy." Noyes: " T^Ae 
 yoke of my transgressions is fastened in His hand. 
 A metaphor drawn from the practice of a hus- 
 bandman, who, after fastening the yoke upon the 
 cattle, keeps the cords wound round his hand. 
 So she says the yoke of her transgressions, i. e., 
 the consequences of them, is fastened upon her 
 
CHAP. 1. 18-16. 
 
 neck, and the cords connected with it wound 
 round the hand of God, so that she could not 
 throw it off." Calvin has a long note to the 
 eame effect. — W. H. H.]. — They are wreathed 
 
 and, or, [leaving out the conjunction which is 
 not in the original] they come up — rise up above 
 — upon my neck. Comp. Ps. xxxviii. 5. As 
 if the yoke were fastened by many cords, inter- 
 woven together, and forming, as it were, a heap 
 or elevation upon the neck. The verbs being in 
 ihe plural must have for their subject the word 
 "transgressions," hence it is evident that he re- 
 garded the sins themselves as the cords which 
 fastened the yoke on the neck. And very cer- 
 tainly sins constitute the bond between the guilty 
 one and his guilt. [Wordswoeth : " Mt/ sins are 
 twined together, so as to fasten the yoke upon my 
 neck. Comp. Deut. xxviii. 48. The reason of 
 this comparison is that sins become punishments 
 [peccati poena peccatum), and are a sore burden, 
 too heavy for the sinner to bear (Ps. xxxviii. 
 4)." Hendekson: "To express more forcibly 
 the complicated character of the iniquities of the 
 Jews as entailing punishment upon them, they 
 are said to entwine or interweave themselves, the idea 
 being probably borrowed from the intertwining 
 of withes for the purpose of binding the yoke 
 with them." The expression, they come up upon 
 my neck (variously rendered, they go over my 
 neck (Broughton), come up about my neck (Bish. 
 Bible), rise up on my neck (Hendekson), are laid 
 upon my neck (Notes), may express the idea of a 
 burden in addition to that of a yoke, that the 
 sins wreathe themselves into a yoke that is heavy 
 and burdensome on the neck, "a yoke which is 
 insupportable" (Wordsworth, Notes), — or the 
 idea may be, that the yoke is so wreathed to- 
 gether and knotted as it were upon the neck, 
 that the head cannot be withdrawn from it. The 
 last seems to be Naegelsbach's idea. So Cal- 
 vin, "we ought to bear in mind the two clauses 
 — that God's hand held the yoke tied, and also 
 that the yoke was bound around the neck of 
 Jerusalem, * * * it is tied, and so fastened, 
 that it cannot be shaken off." So also Brough- 
 ton, who translates, they plat themselves; they go 
 over my neck, and in a treatise on " Jeremie's 
 Lamentations" explains this passage thus: ^'■The 
 yoke of their sin was platted over their head. The 
 state in Jeremie's time was so entangled with 
 the idolatry of the Egyptians and their other 
 friends, that they could not get their head out of 
 it." — W.H.H.] In what follows the Poet as inver. 
 13, drops the metaphorical style for the literal. — 
 He hath made my strength to fall. He has 
 broken my strength. [The primitive meaning of 
 the Hebrew verb suggests the idea of one totter- 
 ing to and fro, staggering from weakness (see 
 Is. V. 27), as, in the present instance, under a 
 heavy yoke. Our E. V. vainly strives to pre- 
 serve this idea in a phrase that is awkward and 
 needs explanation, ''He has made my strength to 
 fall.'' Blayney comes nearer the primitive mean- 
 ing of the verb by using the word ''stumble" 
 instead of "fall," hath caused my strength to 
 stumble. But it is doubtful if the verb, in the 
 form in which it is used, expresses more than the 
 idea of weakening or exhausting the strength. 
 Owen: "He hath weakened my strength." Cal- 
 vin;; corruere fecit [vel, debiiitavit) robur meuin. 
 
 Bishops' Bible and Henderson: "He hath 
 caused my strength to fail." — W. H. H ] — The 
 Lord hath delivered me into their hands, 
 from whom I am not able to rise up, whom 
 
 I cannot resist. — The Lord, Adonai. Tiiis name, 
 Adonai, never occurs alone in the prophecies of 
 Jeremiah, but is always followed by Jehorah (and 
 that, too, according to the Masoretic punctuation 
 •^^n' 'P^.)> i- 6; ii. 19, 22; iv. 10; vii. 20; xiv. 
 18; xliv. 26, xlix. 5; 1. 31. But in the Lamen- 
 tations, Adonai is never followed by Jehovah, and 
 stands alone in fourteen places, i. 14, 15 twice; 
 ii. 1, 2, 5, 7, 18, 19, 20; iii. 31. 36, 37, 58 [see 
 Introduction, Add. Rem., p. 32. If Adonai is 
 the correct reading, its significance is thus ex- 
 plained by Wordsworth: "The prophet appears 
 thus to intimate in the Lamentations, that now, in 
 her captivity and humiliation, Jerusalem felt the 
 lordship of Jehovah, the God of Israel ; but by rea- 
 son of her sins, no longer felt that lordship to be 
 exercised by Him as Jehovah, i. e., as the God of 
 His covenanted people, to protect them. A simi- 
 lar feeling made Solomon abstain in Ecclesiastes 
 from the use of the name Jehovah altogether."] 
 [The argument of Owen for reading ^ptyJ in- 
 stead of "'pli'J, that where all the versions agree, 
 there is a strong presumption that they are 
 right, is offset by the difficulty of construction 
 in that case and the necessity it involves of 
 
 changing 7^' yoke into ?^ upon in the first clause, 
 and the verb 1/^ they rise up into the noun and 
 pronoun Tihp his yoke in the third clause. The 
 difficulties of construction are evident in the 
 translations of Blayney and Owen, the two ad- 
 vocates for this reading; Blayney gives the verb 
 in the singular a plural noun for its subject, 7Hy 
 transgressions have been closely watched; and Owen 
 renders the verb, which is confessedly a passive 
 verb and so rendered by the Sept. and all the old 
 versions except the Vulgate, which Owen him- 
 self says "hardly gives any meaning," in an ac- 
 tive sense, He hath watched over my transgressions 
 A reading involving three changes in the Maso- 
 retic points, and even then incapable of correct 
 grammatical construction, surely ought to be re- 
 jected.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 15 The Lord hath trodden under 
 foot. — Hath cast away, or rejected [de.spised or 
 7nade despicable — W. H. H.]. This verse begins 
 in the literal style of speaking, and ends in the 
 metaphorical. [If our English version is to be 
 retained, trodden underfoot, then the metaphor is 
 begun in the first clause, and beautifully de- 
 veloped as the verse proceeds. But the E. V. 
 cannot be sustained , see Critical Note below. — 
 W. H. H.] All my mighty xaexi.,~Heroes, 
 Ger. Helden [Fuerst: great men^- — In the midst 
 of me; in meiner Mitte. [Calvin. "She says, 
 in the midst of me. And this ought to be observed , 
 for if they had fallen on the field of battle, if 
 they had been taken in the fields by their ene- 
 mies, such a thing would not have been so griev- 
 ous; but that they had thus been laid prostrate" 
 — or rather, deprived of strength to resist and 
 thus rendered contemptible, — " in the very bosoiu 
 of the city, was indeed a token of veng'^auce 
 from above." — He hath called an assembly 
 
56 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 against me — He has proclaimed a solemn feast [a 
 set time. — W. H. H.] against me. — to crush my 
 young men, — to break in pieces my young men. As 
 to a festive gathering the Lord calls her enemies 
 to Jerusalem. The purpose of this festive gather- 
 ing is indicated in a general way by the words 
 against me; but is more clearly indicated by the 
 words to crtish or break in pieices my young men. In 
 this expression is already shadowed forth the 
 following metaphor; for the wine-press breaks 
 to pieces, crushes the berries. [Wordsworth: 
 "An oxymoron; the term to call an assembly sig- 
 nifies the gathering of a holy convocation for 
 fe.«tal rejoicing, or other religious purposes. But 
 now the religious festival of Jerusalem hath 
 ceased (see ver. 4), and God has called an assem- 
 bly of enemies to crush her. Compare the ex- 
 pression to sanctify war, or consecrate an army 
 against a city. See on Isa. xiii. 3; Jer. vi. 4; 
 li. 27, 28; Joel iii. 9." — Though it may impair 
 a beautiful figure, it seems better to take "I^IQ 
 in its usual meaning of a set time. God appointed 
 the time, as for a great solemnity, and it came 
 according to His appointment the time to crush 
 
 the young men. — W. H. H.] 'The Lord hath 
 
 trodden the virgin, the daughter of Judah, 
 as in a ■wine-press. — The Lord trod the ivine- 
 piress of the virgin Judah's daughter. We find sub- 
 stantially the same image used, Joel iv. 13; Isa. 
 Ixiii. 2, 3; llev. xiv. 18-20; xix. 15. [Owen: 
 The tvine-press has the Lord trodden as to the virgin, 
 the daughter of Judah.'\ 
 
 nbo. The meaning is tollere, I'dpfen [to lift up, 
 to remove a thing from its place, to cast it away, 
 and tlius to treat it with contempt, or to destroy 
 it, as the case may be. The old lexicographers, 
 tracing a remote analogy between this verb and 
 
 ?bD, gave to it the sense of treading down, or 
 treading under foot, which is adopted here by E. 
 v., Broughton, Calvin, Blayney, Boothroyd 
 and Noyes ; but has not the sanction of the an- 
 cient versions. Cranmer and Bishops' Bible 
 translate it hath destroyed. Henderson : hath 
 cast away. So Naegelsbach : verworfen hat : so 
 also the Sept., £^>]pev, and the Vulg., abstulit. So 
 also Noyes in Ps. cxix. 118, "Thou easiest off 
 all who depart from Thy laws;" which Alex- 
 ander translates, "Thou despisest all those stray- 
 ing from Thy statutes," in which he agrees with 
 the Sept., E^ov(hi^uaai:, and with the Vulg., spre- 
 visii. This sense, " Thou hast despised," is very 
 suitable to our text. It is still better to give the 
 Piel the force of Hiphil, Thou hast caused to be 
 despised, or rendered despicable, "my mighty 
 men in the midst of me." See Calvin's note 
 above on the words "m the midst of me," and ob- 
 serve how admirably then the first clause of this 
 verse follows the last clause of the preceding 
 verse : She is given up into the hands of those 
 she cannot resist, and thus her mighty men in the 
 midst of her are made objects of contempt. On 
 the other hand, to translate as Naegelsbach, 
 FuERST and Henderson, "The Lord has re- 
 jected, or cast away, all my mighty men in the 
 midst of me," is awkward and not very intelli- 
 gible.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Vur. 10. For these things I weep. — This 
 refers back to ver. 12. Ziuu [Jerusalem] as- 
 
 serted in ver. 12 that no sorrow was like her 
 sorrow. The correctness of this assertion is es- 
 tablished, vers. 13-15, by matters of fact. Zion 
 [Jerusalem] then, in ver. 16, refers in th*; words 
 for these things 1 weep, back to the foregoing as- 
 sertion, whilst she repeats the same with em- 
 phasis though in other words. — Mine eye, 
 mine eye. The emphatic repetition of the same 
 word is not infrequent with Jeremiah; iv. 19, 
 vi. 14; viii. 11; xxiii. 25. — Runneth down 
 w^ith water. See iii. 48; Jer. ix. 17 ; xiii. 17; 
 xiv. 17. — Because the comforter. See ver. 
 2. — that should relieve (marg., bring back) 
 my soul, — the Reviver of my soul: ?ee at ver. 
 1 1 [the Restorer of my soul, more nearly expres- 
 ses the original, which is purposely generic and 
 pregnant. — W. H. H.]. — Is far from me. [Five 
 times in this poem we have an allusion to an 
 absent comforter; vers. 2, 9, 16, 17, 21. That 
 there is an allusion to God the Holy Ghost 
 seems evident. The addition of the words 
 "Restorer of my soul," reminding us of Ps. 
 xxiii. 8, makes this plain. Diodati : " The com- 
 forter, namely, God by His Holy Spirit." It was 
 the absence of God who comforts His people by 
 His word and Spirit, that Jerusalem deplored, 
 and she might have expressed her grief in the 
 words of the Psalmist, " Why standest Thou afar 
 oil'. Jehovah ? Why hidest Thou Thyself in 
 times of trouble (x. 1)?" Noyes betrays the 
 theologicum odium in his version, violating the 
 grammar and changing the text, to destroy any 
 possible reference to a Divine personality, '■'Far 
 from me are they that should comfort me, that should 
 restore my strength." We may translate DflJO the 
 Cdinfor/i'r, or a comfurtcr. the one comforting, one 
 that comforts, but cannot make plurals of it and 
 y^'O, or get the idea of "strength " out of C'pJ. 
 — W. H. H.] — My children are become deso- 
 late, — perished, lit., have become perishing ; same 
 word as is used in ver. 4, "her gates are deso- 
 late" == destroyed. — W. H. H.]— Because the 
 enemy prevailed — prevails [or has become more 
 powerful. Some take this as if an explanation of 
 the preceding, — that Jerusalem is comfortless be- 
 cause the children, who should comfort her, are 
 themselves helpless. But this is too broad a dis- 
 tinction between Jerusalem and her children, and 
 destroys the unity of the ideal image of the mourn- 
 ing daughter of Jerusalem. We are to take the 
 last words as stating a result, rather than a cause 
 of the helpless Jerusalem, forsaken of her com- 
 forter, who could restore her life, and therefore 
 unable to prevent her children from perishing un- 
 der the superior power of the enemy. — W. H. H.] 
 \^X^. ^^^^..- Mineeye,mineeye. Blayney, Booth- 
 royd and Noyes omit the repetition on the au- 
 thority Q(f the ancient versions and some Hebrew 
 MSS. All the other modern versions retain it; 
 even the Douay departs from the Vulgate so far 
 as to read "my eyes." We cannot agree with 
 Blayney that the repetition incumbers the me~ 
 tre. It is more difficult to account for the repe- 
 tition in so many MSS. than for its omission in 
 a very few. Blayney feels this, when he taxes 
 his ingenuity by suggesting that "perhaps ^JN 
 may originally have followed n'I)13, and have 
 been thus the ground of the transcriber's mis- 
 
CHAP. I. 17. 
 
 take." Owen, the editor of Calvin, says: 
 "Though the Sept. and Vulg. do not repeat the 
 'eye,' yet the Targ. has 'my two eyes' " [so the 
 German, meine beiden Augen] " and the Syr. 
 'mine eyes.' " All the ancient versions, there- 
 
 fore, do not omit the second 'J'J;*, as has been 
 asserted. Most of the Heb. MSS. contain it: 
 and it is very emphatic, highly poetical, and 
 "quite in the style of Jeremiah." — W. H. H.] 
 
 I. 17. 
 
 17 Zion spreadeth forth her hands, and there is none to comfort her : the Lord 
 hath commanded concerning Jacob, that his adversaries should be round about 
 him : Jerusalem is as a menstruous woman among them. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 Ver. 17. — nt!''^3. The construction of Piel with 3 follows the analogy of the Hiphil, then too Piel may have a direct 
 
 causative signification. See my Gr.. ^18, III., 2, 3; §69, 1, rem. 2. The Hiphil is found so construed in Jer. xviii. 16. See 
 Ps. .\xii. 8 : .Tob xvi. 10. ["A.s tlie oljjeit of an action may, in certain cases, be regarded as tlie instrument with which it is 
 performed, some transitive verbs admit a construction with 3, with," (Green's 6r., §272, 2, 6) See Judg. iii. 27, 
 
 'ISIK'jl ypn'1. — n'TS. Blatney : "Five MSS. read rn^3, iind the Roman edition of the LXX. represents x^'P"^ avTTjs 
 
 in the singular ; but the Alexand. and Complut. editions read xeipa?-" — W. H. H.]— ^pj;'!. *7 here is not a sign of the 
 
 dative, but a preposition of place. [Chau).eus explains, as quoted by Rosenmueller, ' Jeliovah imposed on the house of Ja- 
 «oh the commandments and law, that they should keep them ; but they themselves transgressed the decree of His word.' It 
 
 is impossible to crowd so much meaning into three words. The 7 obviously does not indicate a commandment given to 
 
 Jacob, but a commandment given concerning Jacob. See H 7ir\3 7, ver. 15. — The ancient versions which give DTJ, ver. 8, 
 
 - : • T • 
 
 the idea of wandering, all agree that mj in this verse has the sense of uncleantiess. Yet Owen would insist on translating 
 
 T ■ 
 
 it here " a wanderer " or fugitive. — W. H. H.] 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 17. The excited speech, begun with last 
 clause of ver. 11, ends with ver. 16, as if from 
 sheer exhaustion. We get the impression from 
 ver. 16, that Zion [.Jerusalem] can speak no 
 more on account of pain and tears. Therefore 
 the Poet allows her a pause. He speaks again 
 himself, in order partly to corroborate what has 
 been said, and partly to adduce new matter. 
 [There is no necessity for assuming a change of 
 speakers. See remarks on vers. 11, 12. — The 
 three ideal persons successively introduced in 
 vers. 1-6, representing the city, the nation, and 
 the Temple, — Jerusalem, Judah, and Zion, — ap- 
 pear again, grouped together, in ver. 17, but in 
 a reverse order, — Zion, Jacob, and Jerusalem. — 
 The poetical effect of this separate stanza, fol- 
 lowing and preceding several connected stanzas, 
 is very fine.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Zion spreadeth forth — stretches out — her 
 hands, and there is none to comfort her, — 
 but there is no Coinforler for her. See ver. 2. 
 The underlying thought is evidently this : Zion 
 imploringly stretched out her hands for help, 
 but finds none, neither from men nor from God, 
 for Jeliovah Himself commanded her neighbors, 
 from whom first of all help was to be expected, 
 to behave in an unfriendly way towards her. 
 [Henderson: "Spreading out the hands is a 
 token of the greatest distress." The commenta- 
 tors generally agree in regarding this as a ges- 
 ture indicating pain ; some even regard it in the 
 sense of wringing the hands ; so Chald^us, 
 quoted by Rosenmueller, expandit Zion manus 
 siias prx angustia, sicut expandit mulier, qui sedet 
 ad pariendum." (See Jer. iv. 31.) But holding 
 
 up or stretching out the hands is a natural ges- 
 ture of entreaty, and is constantly used in the 
 Bible in connection with prayer to God. See 
 especially Ex. ix. 29, 33 ; 1 Kings viii. 38 ; Is. i. 
 15; Ps. xliv. 21; cxliii. 6, where the same He- 
 brew verb is used as here. Naeqelsbach, 
 AuAM Clark and Assembly's Annotations give 
 it this sense in our text. And it is exceedingly 
 appropriate as an act of Zion, the ideal repre- 
 sentative of the religious element of. the theo- 
 cracy and the seat of worship. Zion stretches 
 out her hands in prayer, seeking the Divine 
 Comforter (see ver. 16), but finds Him not: 
 while Jacob, the representative of the theocratic 
 people, is surrounded with enemies, and the 
 queenly city, the seat of the theocratic govern- 
 ment, is become an object of abhorrence. — The 
 unusual occurrence in the Hebrew of the prepo- 
 sition with before the word hands led some of the 
 Jews to adopt a singular translation, which Dio- 
 DATi adopted in the Italian version: '■^Sion distri- 
 bute th bread to herself with her own hands. A de- 
 sci-ipiion of the want of comfort, because that 
 amongst the Jews, the kinsfolks and neighbors 
 did use to bring food to them that mourned for 
 the death of their nearest friends, inviting them 
 to take food and to comfort themselves: see Deut. 
 xxvi. 14; Jer. xvi. 7; Ezek. xxiv. 17; Hos. ix. 
 4." DiODATi's Annotations. — W. H. H.] — -The 
 Lord [Jehovah] hath commanded — given a 
 charge, see Num. xxvii. I'.t — concerning Ja- 
 cob, that his adversaries should be round 
 about him, — that Ins nvigkljors should be his ene- 
 mies. The word translated in E. V. roundabout 
 him does not indicate the place where his enemies 
 were assembled, but is to be understood person- 
 ally, as Jer. xlvlii. 17, 39: Jehovah so ordered 
 it that his neighbors became his oppressors. 
 
58 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 [The use of the masculine pronoun his, instead of 
 the feminine her, shows that there is a distinction 
 between the ideal persons described. When the 
 same person is introduced in ver. 3, under the 
 tribal name of Judah, the feminine particles are 
 used : but the substitution of the name "Jacob " 
 suggests with propriety the idea of a man, ra- 
 ther than of a woman. — The use of masculine or 
 feminine forms in Hebrew indicate often delicate 
 
 shades of feeling or depths of thought. See 
 Pauli's Analecla, Led. XXX. — W. H. H.]— Je- 
 rusalem is as a menstruous vtroman among 
 them — Jerusalem has become an object of abhor- 
 rence in the midst of them. The consequence is 
 that Zion [Jerusalem] at last stands in the midst 
 of her oppressors as a woman defiled with blood 
 and become an object of horror. 
 
 L 18, 19. 
 
 18 The Lord is righteous; for I have rebelled against his commandment : hear, I 
 pray you, all people, and behold my sorrow : my virgins and my young men are gone 
 
 19 into captivity. I called for my lovers, hut they deceived me ; my priests and mine 
 elders gave up the ghost in the city, while they sought their meat to relieve 
 their souls. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 18. TI'ID in'3~'3- This phrase in full does not occur in Jeremiah. He uses rT^D alone, with an accusative 
 
 following, iv. 7, comp. T. 23.— [Henderson : "For D'TS^ read with the Keri D'^jt^H in the vocative." All ye peoples ; 
 Beoughton, Cranmek, Calvin, Blatnet, Boothroyd, Henderson, Noyes.— AV. H. II.] 
 
 Ver. 19.— The Part. 3ni<0 is found in Jeremiah, xxii. 20, 22 ; x.\x. 1-1.— Ue also uses HO"!, iv. 29, but not in Piel.— 
 X'U is not found in Jeremiati. — [The 1 prefixed to ^'yW'' has the force of in order that, as in Job x. 20, and the phrase is 
 fully translated by our infinitive.— The Sept. and Syr. add the vjotAs— and found nowe.— W. H. H.] 
 
 I strength. — My virgins and my young men 
 1 are gone into captivity. See vers. 4, 5, 16. 
 Ver. 19. The second particular feature of her 
 ! sorrow is, that her friends and allies had deserted 
 her. — I called for my lovers, but they de- 
 ceived me — I calledto my lovers, they deceivedine. 
 ; See ver. 2. — The last and crowning cause of her 
 I sorrow is, that those who represented the dignity 
 I and honor of Zion [Jerusalem] are reduced to 
 miserable extremUies in order to preserve their 
 lives. — My priests and mine elders gave 
 up the ghost=^expired or perished — in the city. 
 [Henderson : ^'Elders, occurring as it here does 
 in immediate connection with priests, is to be 
 understood in an official sense, and not as simply 
 indicative of old age. Both, without respect to 
 dignity of office, were under the necessity of go- 
 ing in quest of food." Tiiey died in the ci/y — not 
 from the sword of the enemy on the battle-field, 
 but while hemmed in by surrounding enemies, 
 and seeking food in vain within the walls ; they 
 perished from sheer starvation. — W. H. H.] — ■ 
 ■While they sought their meat to relieve 
 their souls — for they sought food for them.selues in 
 onirr to revive their souls. See vers. 6-11. [Words- 
 wouTU: ''for they (even the priests and elders) 
 sought for meat (and sought in vain) to recover 
 their fainting souls." For themselves, n/ ; Rosen- 
 MUELLER explains the pronoun as used in a re- 
 flexive or reciprocal sense. It is certainly em- 
 phatic, and suggests the severity of the famine, 
 when the nobility are forced to go themselves in 
 search of food to preserve their own lives. — 
 W. H. H.] 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 18. Vers. 18, 19 contain nothing new. 
 They only recapitulate. But it is noteworthy 
 that Zion [Jerusalem], who is now again in a 
 condition to speak [see remarks on preceding 
 verse], begins with an acknowledgment of the 
 righteousness of God and of her own unrighteous- 
 ness. — The Lord is lighteous— Righteous is 
 He, Jehovah. [Owen: "Righteous He Jehovah: 
 the pronoun is used instead of the verb is — a 
 common thing in H.ebrew."] This acknow- 
 ledgment, that the Lord is righteous, is found in 
 Jer. xii. 1. See Deut. xxxii. 4 ; 2 Chron. xii. 6; 
 Ps. cxix. 137 ; cxxix. 4; cxlv. 17.— For I have 
 rebelled against His commandment. Bet- 
 ter, disobeyed Bis commandment, lit., resisted His 
 mouth. The same expression occurs in Num. xx. 
 24; xxvii. 14; 1 Kings xiii. 21, 26. — Hear, I 
 pray you [theHeb. particle of entreaty, XJ], all 
 people [lit., all peoples'], and behold my sor- 
 row. Although willing to confess her guilt, yet 
 Zion [Jerusalem] feels the need of human sym- 
 pathy. She summons, therefore, as in ver. 12, 
 all peoples to observe her sorrow. [Since men 
 of the acknowledged taste of Henderson and 
 Noyes sanction the use of the reduplicated plural 
 peoples, we may be allowed to retain it; espe- 
 cially since no other word in English is its exact 
 equivalent. — \V. H H.] — Then she recounts, as 
 in vers. 13-15, the principal causes of her sor- 
 row. The first is the captivity of her young wo- 
 men and young men, who are her pride and 
 
CHAP. I. 20-22. 
 
 59 
 
 I. 20-22. 
 
 20 Behold, O Lord, for I am in distress ; my bowels are troubled ; mine heart is turned 
 within me : for I have grievously rebelled : abroad the sword bereaveth, at home there 
 
 21 is as death. They have heard that I sigh ; there is none to comfort me : all mine ene- 
 mies have heard of my trouble ; they are glad that thou hast done it : thou wilt bring 
 
 22 the day that thou hast called, and they shall be like unto me. Let all their wicked- 
 ness come before thee ; and do unto them as thou hast done unto me for all my trans- 
 gressions : for my sighs are many, and my heart is faint. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 20.— The sing. *12f never occurs in Jeremiah. See ver. 5. [Naegeisbach here, inadvertently (or else he would 
 
 have cited this ver. at ver. 5), mistakes the noun "^"^ or *1i*, used at ver. 5, for this ^y, which is 3d sing. perf. of Tl)f, and 
 
 is so given by Gesenius, Fuerst and Davidson, and is translated as a verb by nearly all the versions. — W. II. II.] — ''V'O in 
 
 Jer. iv. 19 ; xxxi. SO.^OD'^Dni to hoil, move in an undulating manner ; except here and ii. 11, only in Job xvi. 16. — See 
 
 T : -t: 
 Olsh., 2 2.52, 6. — The pause accent Aatliciiah belongs undtr '3"1p. [An unnecessary change of punctuation. — W. II. H.J — 
 
 rr^O- See ver. 18. The Inf. no is found only here.— The Piel S jiy, in Jer. xv. 7. Comp. i. 9 ; Lev. xxvi. 22 ; 1 Sam. iv. 
 
 33.— Y^nO./ori's, Jer. xxi. 4. 
 
 Ver. 21. — [IJ^OtJ'- The Sept. and Syr. improperly render it in the Imperative. — W. H. H.] — njXJ, see ver. i. — PIV'^, a 
 
 very current word with Jeremiah. — tUVi,', Jer. xxxii. 41. — ri't^y as the antithesis of speaking, as Jer. iii. 5. [If we take 
 
 T • T 
 
 doing here as the antithesis of speaking, the absence of the affix is emphatical. Thou hast done, acted, as well as spoken. 
 This verb often occurs without an object expressed. See I'uerst, Lex. — \V. H. H.]— riX3n, as Jer. vi. 19 ; xi. 11, and else- 
 
 T 
 
 where. — Nip, of prophetical proclamation, Jer. ii. 2; vii. 2 ; xix. 2. 
 
 Ver. 22. — XJH- On account of the Imperative 7*71 17, we must understand this as stronger than a wish : let it come 
 which is grammatically allowable. See my Gr., § 89, 3 c. — The phrase 'JS 7 Hyi HNS is not found in Jeremiah.— 
 
 II. T T T>T 
 
 7 71^1- See ver. 12. [Wordsworth says, "the primary notion" of this word ''seems to be that of plucking," and refers to 
 
 Gesen., 633. So Cranmer's B.: Thou shall pluck them away even as thou hast plucked me. The Sept. gives it the sense of 
 
 racemandi, gleaning ; and substitutes 3d person plur. for 2d sing., and does not translate ^7 at all. Kal cn-K^iiAAio-oi' aurois, 
 
 ov TpoTTov eTTOirjo-o.i' eTTii^uAAiSa. The Vulg. takes it in the sense of gathering the vintage, and preserves the grammatical 
 construction of the original : vindemin eos sicut vindemiasti me. Instead of the eTTi<j>v\\L<Tov of the Codex Vaticanus, the 
 Codex Alexandrinus has iTTi(j>av\i.<Tot', whicli seems to mean reject them as vile. That our version is correct would appear 
 
 from the use of Dw'lJ^D for actions, doings, or deeds. See Jer. xvii. 10 ; Prov. xx. 11. See Rosenmueller. — W. H. H.] — 
 
 'VC'3~73 IV- See vers. 5, 14.— TltUX, ver. 6.— '^ '37 is found in Jeremiah, viii. 18, comp. Is. i. 5. 
 T T : T - - : - — 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 The Poet closes with a prayer, which is com- 
 posed of an exordium, ver. 20 a; two prin- 
 cipal parts: 1. Ver. 20 b, to ver. 21 c. 2. 
 Ver. 21 c, to ver. 22 c ; and a conclusion, ver. 
 22 c. 
 
 Ver. 20. Behold, O Lord ; for I am in dis- 
 tress, — Behold, Jehovah, how lam distre-ised ! 
 With these words. Behold, O Jehovah, how hadli/ 
 it fares with me, first of all, the attention of Je- 
 hovah is directed to Zion,and her misfortune is in 
 general terms commended to His consideration. 
 — The words Behold, Jehovah, are the same as 
 See, Jehovah, of ver. 11. — Then follows the 
 first part of the prayer, which extends to ver. 
 21 c, in which are successively detailed the causes 
 of her distress, proceeding from those of an in- 
 ternal to those of an external cliaracter. 1. We 
 have her sufferings subjectively considered, in two 
 particulars — (a). My bowels are troubled. 
 [He\df;uson: My bowels arc made to boil. Nae- 
 GELSB \f;n : Meine Eingewide wallen siederid aiif. 
 The Hebrew word " is strongly expressive of 
 that violently excited state of the intestines which 
 is occasioned by excessive grief " (Henderson), 
 
 or rather, which was employed as an image of 
 mental perturbations and distress. — W. H. H.] 
 (b). — Mine heart is turned within me. The 
 expression is found in this sense, of the turning 
 of the heart as a symptom of the most painful 
 affection, only elsewhere in Hos. xi. 8. In 
 another sense, Ex. xiv. 5. — 2. We have a state- 
 ment of the reason which has occasioned her 
 chastisement. — For I have grievously re- 
 beHed. Since J rebelliousli/ have rebelled. These 
 words belong evidently to what follows, and ac- 
 cordingly the particle at the beginning is not /or, 
 but since, or because. For the first and immedi- 
 ate result of disobedience was the punishment 
 described in what follows, rather than the suf- 
 fering caused by that punishment. Besides if 
 this clause belongs to what precedes it, then the 
 first half of the verse has four members, and the 
 last only two. [The sense is not affected, 
 whether we connect this with what precedes, or 
 with what follows. The irregular division of the 
 verses is too common to authorize here a change 
 in the Masoretic punctuation, such as Naj;gels- 
 BACH proposes (see Gram, note above), merely for 
 the sake of an equal division of this verse. — W. 
 H. H.] — -3. We have the punishment itself in 
 declarations of concentrated meaning. — Abroad 
 
«0 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 the sword bereaveth. at home there is as 
 death, — Rages withoxit the sirord, on willtin Death. 
 For the sense according to kindred places, we 
 have Jer. xiv. 18 ; Ez. vii. 15. By death in an- 
 tithesis to the sword it is natural to understand, 
 death wrought by hunger, or pestilence. See 
 Jer. XV. 2 ; xviii. 21. [Boothroyd : " Death as 
 it were acting in propria persona, and not by the 
 instrumentality of aiiotluT, as \v!i('!i a person is 
 slain by the sword" (Biblia Uebraica). See Jer. 
 ix. 21; Hab. ii. 5. Adam Clark gives examples 
 from the poets of similar personification of death. 
 — W. H. H.] 
 
 ['S 1^, impers. lit., it is strait to me, that is, / 
 am in a strait, I am distressed, I grieve. ''7~iy~''3 
 seems itself a cry of distress, the sharpness of 
 which is lost in the E. Y.,for J am in distress. — 
 My boivels, etc. It seems impossible to repro- 
 duce this in an English form ; at least our ideas 
 of the commotions of the bowels have no associa- 
 tion with agitations of the mind. To say with 
 Henderson, "my bowels are made to boil," 
 though it seems to be sanctioned by the meaning 
 of the verb, yet does not really express the idea 
 of violent motion, as witnessed in boiling water, 
 or the surging of the ocean, which is the idea 
 intended. To say with Notes, My boivels boil, is 
 worse yet, as the verb is strictly passive. If we 
 might be allowed to ignore the figure, and say 
 simply, »(«/ 7ni7id is greatly agitated, we would more 
 correctly interpret the words to English ears, 
 than by a figurative use of the word bowels, that 
 never 'was ingrafted into English thoughts and 
 feelings. If we could accept the opinion that in 
 ancient usage the word boivels denoted the upper 
 viscera and was not restricted as by modern 
 usage to the lower viscera (see Alexander on 
 Is. xvi. 11), we might substitute the vf or d bosojn 
 with advantage. But accepting the usual signifi- 
 cation of '^O, we can give to nO"^"5n no other 
 English form than we have done, greatly troubled. 
 Owen: " Troubled, or disquieted, is the rendering 
 of all the versions, and also of the Targ. As it 
 is a reduplicate, the verb means greatly troubled 
 
 or greatly disturbed, or violently agitated." — ''S/ 
 "IDHJ. RosENMUELLER refers to a similar phrase 
 in Ps. xxxviii. 11 ; "^n"'np ""S ', cor meum circumit, 
 circumagitur : Alexander explains it of "the 
 palpitation of the heart, denoting violent agita- 
 tion." — W. H. H.] — The reading r\irD3, whatever 
 may be urged against it, is very old, for the Sept. 
 has uarrep -ddvaro^. But it is impossible to at- 
 tach to this 2 (if it be understood here as a 
 particle of comparison, or as a so-called Kaph 
 veritatis), a pertinent sense. For r\'33 stands 
 here in antithesis to ^IPID; 7171112^ is their com- 
 mon predicate ; and to fill out the sense there 
 should be a subject indicated corresponding to 
 3"in. To supply 2^n again, or with Ewald the 
 idea '^ something similar'' before rilJSS, would give 
 us a construction in the highest degree forced 
 and unnatural. Unless we suppose a mistake of 
 the transcriber and read simply ril^L*' "■** '^^ 
 Syriac has it, there is nothing left but to trans- 
 pose the words, and to read r\"32 r\1J33, which 
 
 the text of the Sept. seems to sanction, for since 
 the Sept. translates ug ^^dvarog kv oIku, its au- 
 thors apparently read the Hebrew words in the 
 order indicated. [Rosenmueller: "Pareau re- 
 gards the 2, placed before mo in this place, not 
 as the particle of similitude, but what the Gram- 
 marians call tlio D veritatis, which not seldom is 
 used for the name of the thing or person referred 
 to. But I proler to suppose, Wxth L(ewe and 
 WoLFSsoHN, that the words are to be transposed, 
 
 as may be done ; n;33 n]p3 2"}^ nSnti? |*inp, 
 without the sword bereeives, even as death within." — 
 Henderson has a curiously unsatisfactory re- 
 mark, which his translation doos not clear up, 
 " the Caph is the Caph veritatis expressing the 
 reality of the thing." What "thing?" Famine 
 or pestilence? We must either adopt Naegels- 
 bach's opinion, with which Sept., Syr. and Arab, 
 agree, and transpose the words. Abroad the sword 
 has bereaved me, as death at home; or suppose an 
 awkward prosopopoeia in the substitution of the 
 word death for famine ov pestilence, in which case 
 the 3 is strictly the 3 veritatis ; or we must trans- 
 late as Henderson (though his translation is at 
 variance with his explanation). Abroad the sword 
 bereaveth, in the house it is as death, and accept 
 the suggestion of Calvin, that the 2 is the 2 of 
 similitude, at home it is as death, as if he would 
 say, nothing met them at home but that which 
 was like death itself. There is iis lii;le, if not 
 less, difficulty in the first of these explanations, 
 as in either of the others. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 21. 4. We have the rejoicing of her ene- 
 mies at her misfortunes. This subject, now first 
 alluded to, the Poet dwells upon at some length, 
 whilst he only briefly indicated the nuvtters that 
 have been moutioned. — They have heard that 
 I sigh, there is none to comfort me, — tliat 1 
 have no coinjoricr. — All mine enemies have 
 heard of my trouble. What the enemies heard 
 is described as if it came to t!i?m bo:-ne on suc- 
 cessive waves of rumor, proceeding by degrees 
 from the circumference to the very centre of 
 their grief. At first they heard how Zion [Jeru- 
 salem] bitterly mourned, because left alone, with- 
 out Comforter and Helper (see ver. 2), she was 
 exposed to the violence of her enemies. Then 
 they [her enemies] began to comprehend the na- 
 ture and extent of her misfortune. But they re- 
 joiced that Jehovah had done it, that is to say, 
 He had actually brought about the day which He 
 had before predicted. — They are glad that 
 Thou hast done it. Thou wilt bring the 
 day that Thou hast called (Marg., pro- 
 claimed). They rejoiced because Thou hast done 
 it, that Thou hast brought the day Thou hadst pro- 
 claimed. It will be observed that 1 take the last 
 clause as epexegetical. This seems to me neces- 
 sary. For, 1. To give a precatory sense to the 
 last clause [as Luther, let the day come; Hen- 
 derson : Bring the day ivhich Thou hast announced ; 
 NoYES: O bring the day ivhich Thou hast appointed. 
 — W. H. H.] is very forced. 2. These words are 
 a very suitable explanation of the preceding 
 clause : the Lord has done it by bringing about 
 in fact the day He had predicted or proclaimed, 
 that is to say. He had not merely spoken, but 
 acted [not merely threatened, but carried His 
 threat into execution, by doing what He had said 
 
CHAi'. 1. 
 
 Gl 
 
 He would do]. Least of all can we say, Thou 
 bringest, Thou proclaimest the day, for this would 
 require a change in the order of the words in 
 the Hebrew, and the text should read DV HXIp- 
 
 T tIt 
 
 EwALD, following the Sept. ["ETr^j-aypf fjiiepav, 
 £Kd},Eaag Kaipoi'l^, supplies fl^ [an appointed time] 
 after flN'lp. This is unnecessary and arbitrary. 
 [Calvin explains this clause as Naegelsbach 
 does: and his English translator, Owen, remarks: 
 " Our version is wrong in rendering this clause 
 in the future tense. The reference is not to the 
 day of vengeance to the Babylonians, but to the 
 day of vengeance which God had brought on His 
 own people. The versions, except the Syr., give 
 the verb in the past tense." So Wordsworth: 
 " They are glad that Thou hast done it ; that Thou 
 hast brought (upon me) the day (of sorrow) which 
 Thou hadst proclaimed (by Thy prophets, who 
 warned me of my impending destruction)." — AV. 
 H. H.]. That the Lord had threatened the peo- 
 ple of Israel with eventual destruction, was well 
 known to the heathen. See Jer. xl. 2, 3. — 
 And they shaU be like unto me. The 
 second principal part of the prayer begins with 
 this petition, that the Lord would visit her ene- 
 mies with the same fiite which had befallen her. 
 [Wordsworth: "The Edomites, Moabites and 
 Ammonites, who exulted over the destruction of 
 Jerusalem, will share the same fate, at the hand 
 of the same enemy. See iv. 21 ; Jer. xii. 14; 
 XXV. 21 ; and Babylon lierself also will be pun- 
 ished for her cruelty to Zion (Jer. 1. 9, 10; li. 
 35; Is. xlvii. 6)]." 
 
 It cannot be objected to the above interpreta- 
 tion, that then the adversative sentence should 
 begin with Oni, for the subject of the adversative 
 sentence is the same as that of the preceding one, 
 only viewed in a different light. Whilst what 
 precedes shows what the enemies hitherto had 
 done (IJ^ptr;, i;;pt:/, Wr), the adversative sen- 
 tence shows what in the future will be done to 
 them: therefore, from lyoti/ to HNTp the perfect 
 
 : |T T tIt ' 
 
 only is used, from '''H'l the imperfect only. If 
 the sentence began with nXDH, the proper gram- 
 matical construction would be -vm or xipn Nori 
 
 T : tI: • • T 
 
 ''V^^- — [^V^^- Rosenmueller: "In the repeti- 
 tion of this word there is emphasis, as below, iii. 
 43, 44 ; Ps. cxxiv. 1, 2. The introduction of this 
 verb, at first, without a subject expressed, was 
 doubtless an expedient suggested by the alpha- 
 betical arrangement of the verses which required 
 an initial W ; but its introduction in the next 
 clause, with the subject expressed, and that in an 
 intensified form, — ''heard (have they) that I 
 sigh," etc. — " ALL my enemies heard of my trouble" 
 — is one of those triumphs of the art of the true 
 poet, by which he makes even the artificial and 
 arbitrary laws of poetry contribute to the force 
 and beauty of his sentiments, — '3. Owen: 
 " There are here two instances of '3 being carried 
 on to the next clause, — 
 
 Heard have they tliat I stgh, Wai I have no romfnrter: 
 All mine enemies have heard of my evil ; luey have rejoiced 
 That Thou hast done it, that Thou hast brought the day 
 Thou hast announced." 
 
 It ii better, however, to consider each '3 as 
 
 uniting the two clauses that follow it as in close 
 apposition, in each case the latter clause being 
 explanatory of the preceding one: They heard 
 that I sigh, I have no comforter, i. e., I sigh be- 
 cause I have no comforter. They rejoiced thai 
 Thou hast done it. Thou hast brought the day, i. e., 
 Thou hast done it by bringing the day. — Thuu 
 hast done il. The gloss of the famous Jew, Jar- 
 CHi, quoted by Rosenmueller, is singular, and 
 shows what far-fetched interpretations of Scrip- 
 ture have been allowed: "Thou hast afforded 
 the occasion why my enemies have hated me and 
 rejoiced in my misfortune, because Thou hast 
 given us commandment not to eat and drink what 
 they do, nor to enter into marriages with them. 
 If only I had joined myself in marriage with 
 them, they would have been disposed to pity me 
 and the children of their own daughters." — W. 
 H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 22. Let aU their 'wickedness come 
 before Thee. The expression come before Thee 
 is to be understood in the sense of becoming ac- 
 quainted with. See Gen. xxxvii. 2. — And do 
 unto them as thou hast done unto me fot 
 all my transgressions [see gram, notes above]. 
 For my sighs are many and my heart is 
 faint. The conclusion of the prayer contains a 
 declaration of fact. It is impossible to refer this 
 to the thoughts immediately before expressed: 
 for neither confession of sin ("for all my trans- 
 gressions"), nor prayer for the retribution of 
 the injustice done by her enemies ("do unto 
 them as they have done unto me"), could sug- 
 gest this concluding sentence. Rather, it relates 
 generally to the prayer for help, which is con- 
 tained as well under the second head, as in the 
 first part of the prayer. This last clause, con- 
 taining the evidence of her need of help, natu- 
 rally recalls the prayer for help. 
 
 DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 
 
 1. Vers. 1-3. This change of fortune, befallen 
 the holy city and holy people, may well claim 
 our sympathy in the highest degree. But at the 
 same time we should let it be to us a solemn 
 warning. For if this was done to the green 
 tree, what shall be done to the dry (Luke xxiii. 
 31) ? If God rejected the people whom He called 
 the apple of His eye (Dent, xxxii. 10), if He ex- 
 posed to destruction the city, in reference to 
 which He said, that "His fire is in Zion, and 
 His furnace in Jerusalem" (Is. xxxi. 9), what 
 claim can the people, kingdoms and dynasties of 
 the Gentiles have? — what claim can the particu- 
 lar Christian churches even have ? — what claim 
 can Rome, Geneva and Wirtemberg have to the 
 privilege of eternal existence? Truly, since the 
 Lord could destroy Jerusalem and entirely lay 
 waste Canaan, without being unfaithful to His 
 promise given to the Fathers, eveii so He can re- 
 move the candlestick of every particular Christian 
 church, without breaking the promise given to 
 the church at large, that the gates of Hell shall 
 not prevail against it (Matth. xvi. 18). 
 
 2. Vers. 1-11. "From Jeremiah's passionate 
 lamentation over the wretched condition of the 
 Jewish land and people, we derive a lesson in 
 reference to the manner in which one in groat 
 affliction and misery may be allowed to behave. 
 
62 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 There have been found, among the heathen, per- 
 sons reputed for wisdom, some of whom have held 
 the opinion, that a wise, intelligent man should 
 be altogether emotionless, neither rejoicing in 
 good fortune, nor cast down by bad fortune, but 
 willing to let things be as they are. But we see 
 the very opposite of this in pious, holy persons, 
 especially here in Jeremiah, where he bitterly 
 laments the misery of his people and fatherland. 
 Could he have hoped for deliverance from that 
 misery, or any mitigation of it, how heartily 
 would he have rejoiced ! And such emotions, if 
 properly controlled, are not obnoxious to God, 
 since He Himself has implanted them in our hu- 
 man nature. As it would displease a faithful 
 father, should his children laugh when he pun- 
 ished them, so it cannot please God when His 
 people show no sign of grief on account of His 
 chastisements. If we should, in the ordinary 
 afi'airs of life, rejoice with those who rejoice, and 
 weep with those who weep (Rom. xii. 15), and as 
 the elect of God, holy and beloved, should mani- 
 fest hearty commiseration towards the suffering 
 (Col. iii. 12), much more should we, in times of 
 general and national calamities, not then be joy- 
 ful, but heartily mourn and lament on account 
 of the losses and evils suffered by the public 
 generally. Those who do not so, the Lord God 
 reproves ; because they eat and drink joyfully, 
 and are not at all concerned for the calamity of 
 Joseph, He threatens severely to punish their 
 false security." Wueetem. Summ. 
 
 3. Ver. 1. The Targum Jonathan compares 
 the destruction of Jerusalem with the expulsion 
 from Paradise: "It was with Jerusalem as with 
 Adam and Eve, when they were judged, who 
 were ejected from the Paradise of pleasure, and 
 then the Governor of the universe lamented over 
 them." — Origen conceives that under the image 
 of Jerusalem, formerly noble and splendid, but 
 now become widowed and servile, the human 
 soul is represented: "In a sublimer sense, Jeru- 
 salem, in the enjoyment of felicity, abounding 
 in people and nations, and the head of provinces, 
 is the (divina est anima) soul which is of divine 
 origin. * * * Even as we are permitted to see 
 Jerusalem, living in the greatest prosperity, with 
 a large population, crowded with foreigners, and 
 head of the provinces, but when virtue fails, de- 
 solate and widowed and enslaved, so that it be- 
 comes tributary to the enemy that conquered it, 
 so it happens to the soul of him who has fallen 
 from virtue." Ghisler., p. 11. — So also Olymi'io- 
 uoRUs: "She became as a widow, having been 
 deprived of the bridegroom — the Logos." — So 
 also Rhaban Maurus: "Lamentation is made 
 for the faithful soul of man, which formerly was 
 full of virtues and controlled its various passions, 
 governing tne appetites of the flesh; but after- 
 wards inflamed by the fire of lust through the 
 agency of malignant spirits, deprived of angelic.vl 
 consolation and wanting divine communion, it 
 was givea over to serve as many masters as it 
 liad vices." Ibid., p. 10.— Hugo a Sancto Vic- 
 tore: "When God reigning in our hearts go- 
 verns us, then the flesh subjected serves Him in 
 the outward life, and in proportion as we are in- 
 wardly more humbly submissive to Him, we have 
 in a stronger degree the mastery over the out- 
 ward life. Thus, therefore, our soul, when it 
 
 had God for its King, was withiu 'full of people,' 
 i.e., of virtues, and without was also 'mistress 
 of the nations' — that is, of carnal desires, and 
 'a princess of provinces' — that is, of the bodily 
 senses. But now she is 'solitary,' because she 
 has lost her king ; she is a ' widow,' because she 
 is separated from her husband; she is 'tribu- 
 tary,' because she serves the vices to which she 
 is subject." Ibid. 
 
 4. Ver. 1. Jerusalem, in this passage, is re- 
 garded by many as a type of the church. So 
 says Paschasius Radbertus : "The Prophet 
 mourns, not only because shesitteth in garments 
 soiled with dust and earthly deeds (sedet pulve- 
 reis et terrenis operibus sordidata), but espe- 
 cially because she 'sitteth solitary.' Solitary, 
 moreover, because 'as a widow.' And widowed, 
 because she has been deserted by her husband on 
 account of the filtiiiness of her turpitude. But 
 it should be observeil that she is said to be '«.? a 
 widow,' and not really a widow; since, although 
 she is despised by her spouse, yet her rights of 
 marriage remain, so that if she should reform 
 and discharge the duties of her former love, she 
 may at least receive her husband and immortality 
 through her penitence." Ghisler., p. 9. — Hugo 
 a Sancto Victore allegorizes in another fashion: 
 " How is it that while we perceive so many peo- 
 ple in the church, we see the church herself 'so- 
 litary ?' Because we can find hardly any one 
 who may be esteemed as truly with the church. 
 * * * As Christ remains untouched by the 
 crowd pressing upon Him (Mark v. 24-34), so 
 the church, the body of Christ, ' sitteth solitary' 
 amidst a multitude, because the Catholic faith 
 has many professors, but few imitators." Ibid., 
 pp. 9, 10. — In another way still, the Abbot Ru- 
 pert VON Deutz: "What city is it that was 'full 
 of people,' etc.? That holy city, Jerusalem, for- 
 sooth, the mother of us all, whose citizens we 
 are, whosoever of us .are believers. That city, 
 before the creation of the world, was already 
 full of people in the foreknowledge or predesti- 
 nation of God. * * * How has it come to pass 
 that she should sit solitary, should become as a 
 widow, should pay tribute ? Forsooth by trans- 
 gressing; namely, by one man's sinning, the first 
 man's, for in him the whole multitude of his pos- 
 terity sinned and suffered condemnation. Thus 
 has it come to pass that the holy city should sit 
 solitary — should sit, as it were, as a widow, not 
 having her husband — God, a church holy through 
 faitli, though cast out of Paradise, a wanderer 
 in this world, suffering through exile, death and 
 an offended Lord — that is, paying penal tribute 
 for sin." Ibid., p. 10. 
 
 [5. Vers. 1-11. With regard to the allegorical 
 and mystical interpretations of this song, we may 
 adopt the language of Kitto on 1 Sam. xvii.: 
 '■Altiiough we do not, with some, think that 
 'ihc.ic things are an allegory,' * * * it is impossi- 
 ble for the experienced Christian to read it with- 
 out being reminded of eventful passages in his 
 own spiritual history. Tliere is no doubt sonic 
 mysterious connection bet ween even the external 
 things of Scripture history, and the inner tilings 
 of our spiritual life, which 'the wise' are ci a- 
 bled, by the Spirit's teaching, to discern, jind 
 wliich renders the seemingly least spiritual pints 
 of the holy writ richly nourishing to their souls" 
 
CHAP. I. 
 
 33 
 
 {Daily Bible Illustrations). — Scott: "The se- 
 rious mind perceives abundant cause to meditate, 
 with solemn awe and deep concern, on the to- 
 kens of His indignation at the sins of men. * * ■* 
 How is it that so many populous cities now sit 
 solitary? That so many flourishing empires are 
 now become tributary and enslaved? Whence are 
 the tears, with which vast multitudes wear aw;iy 
 their restless nights and joyless days; whilst 
 they mourn the loss of dear relatives, the trea- 
 chery of professed friends, the cruelty of ene- 
 mies, the oppression of the powerful, the fury of 
 persecutors, grievous servitude and multiplied 
 afiBictions ? Whence is it, that idolaters now oc- 
 cupy the places where flourishing churches once 
 were? That the ways of Zion are deserted, her 
 ordinances interrupted or profaned, her gates 
 desolated, her priests and people in bitterness, 
 or cut off? How is it that the adversaries of the 
 church are the chief, and prosper, and that her 
 children are in captivity? However we may 
 vary our inquiries, the same answer recurs: the 
 fierce anger of the Lord for man's transgressions 
 hath filled the earth with sighs and groans, with 
 tears, sickness and death. * * * Sin fills our 
 consciences with remorse and our hearts with 
 terror; deprives the soul of strength and confi- 
 dence; perverts every pleasant thing and every 
 good gift of God, and even His truths. Sabbaths 
 and ordinances into occasions of deeper con- 
 demnation and misery. * * * Among the ma- 
 nifold evil effects of sin, the pious mind is pecu- 
 liarly grieved, when, being committed by profes- 
 sors of true religion, it causes the enemies of 
 God to blaspheme, and to mock and scofi^ at the 
 truths and ordinances of His word and worship. 
 Wo be to the world because of such ofi"ences : and 
 wo be to those by whom such ofi'ences come, ex- 
 cept their repentance be as deep as their trans- 
 gressions are aggravated. We ought to prefer 
 any of the other temporal efi"ects of sin to this. 
 Should any be wonderfully brought down from 
 the height of aflliience to the depth of penury ; 
 should their honor be changed for contempt; 
 should they have no comforter in afiiiction, and 
 be constrained to part with all their pleasant 
 things for bread to sustain life; nay, should 
 they have the prospect of dying by famine; yet 
 all this ought to be considered as far less afflict- 
 ing than that their sins should cause the name, 
 truths and ordinances of God to be blasphemed ; 
 and men to stumble and fall and perish forever, 
 through the increasing prejudice, hardness and 
 impiety that they have excited. Even the pro- 
 fanation of sacred things, and the sacrilege of 
 those who, in ditferent ages, have laid their ra- 
 pacious hands on the substance which was dedi- 
 cated to the support of religion; and the con- 
 tempt with which the clerical ofiice hath been 
 treated by profligates and infidels , have in great 
 measure been chargeable upon the atrocious 
 sins of professors and preachers of the gospel, 
 who have rendered themselves vile, and exposed 
 themselves to shame Dy their evident miscon- 
 duct: aiid therefore the Lord hath made them 
 vile and contemptible even to the most abandoned 
 of mankind." [Practical Observations). — W. H. H.] 
 6. Vers. 1-3. " If God's chastisements begin, 
 they come not once, twice, or thrice only, but tliey 
 fol!(?w one after another, as one wave pursues 
 
 another in a tempestuous ocean (Ps. xlii. 8). 
 For no misfortune comes alone, as is plainly seen 
 in the present instance in the case of the Jews." 
 Cramer according to Eo. Hunnius ISer. 2, p 
 28). 
 
 7. Ver. 4. •' What an unspeakable blessing of 
 God it is, when He gives public tranquility, so 
 that people may come in crowds and regularly 
 observe the holy rites of Divine worship, the 
 world knows not, until God creates a famine of 
 His Word and people seek for it over land and 
 water without finding it. Let us be admonished 
 to love the Word of God and the sanctuary where 
 it is preached. Example: David, Ps. xxvi. 8; 
 xxvii. 4." Cramer by Eg. Hunnius [Ser. 2, p. 
 19). "0 how many people there are who sigh 
 after the precious gospel and have willingly 
 gone in crowds over many miles to the places, 
 where alone they could obtain and enjoy it. 
 These will on that day stand up and condemn 
 those, who have had it at their very doors, and 
 yet have regarded it so disdainfully and treated 
 it so carelessly." Eg. Hunnius, Ser. 2, p. 20. 
 
 8. Ver. 5. " God has, on account of Zion's 
 sins, set her enemies in authority over her. 
 What does not this signify ! The enemy governs 
 at pleasure ! Thus the church must be trodden 
 under foot by the world — and this drives her 
 anew to penitence and prayer. The youth must 
 go bound into slavery. To be obliged to see this, 
 breaks the heart. He who will not understand 
 that it is the enemy of souls, who leads the chil- 
 dren, bound by lusts and false doctrine, to hell, 
 that person must regard evei'y thing tliat he re- 
 flects upon in a gross and literal sense." Died- 
 
 RICH. 
 
 9. Ver. 5. "The devil is the autlior of our 
 spiritual captivity (Col. i. 13 ; 2 Tim. ii. l^ij), 
 Christ is our Redeemer (John viii. 3G), the mtans 
 of redemption are — in respect to the price paid 
 [vsii'ioxiQ acquisitionis) the blood of Christ (Zech. 
 ix. 11 ; Col. i. 14J, — but with regard to its actual 
 application to us (respectu a,utem ezhibitionis) the 
 Word and Sacraments, especially Baptism which 
 by St. Basil, in his Homily on 'Holy Baptism,' 
 is called 'the ransom for captives^ (Isa. Ixi. 1)." 
 
 FORSTER. 
 
 10. Ver. 5. Forster here considers the ques- 
 tion, how the participation of children in the 
 sufi'erings of their parents for sins of which the 
 children are innocent, may be explained. He 
 refers in this connection to Luther's explanation 
 of Ex. XX. 5, where it is said: "This question, 
 why the son suffers for the father, the prophet 
 Ezekiel hath treated of and says (xviii. 2), 'The 
 fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the chil- 
 dren's teeth are set on edge ;' and Jeremiah saya 
 (xxxi. 29?), "Our fathers have sinned and are 
 gone, but we must suffer for their sins ;' — and it 
 is still so in our days; we sin and deserve what 
 those who come after us must suffer. We are 
 not to understand by this that the child is damned 
 on account of the father, as if it referred to the 
 [eternal] punishment of souls. 'AH souls,' says 
 God by Ezekiel (xviii. 4), 'are mine: as the soul 
 of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine ; 
 the soul that sinneth it shall die.' But we should 
 understand this of temporal punishment; He 
 punishes children on account of the fathers, by 
 letting them die who must yet at any rate die." 
 
64 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 11. Ver. 5. For the multitude of her trans- 
 gressions. — " If thou fearest not sin, fear at 
 least that which sin leads to." Augustin by 
 
 FORSTER. 
 
 12. Ver. 6. Her princes have become like 
 harts, etc. — " The deer is an extremely timid 
 animal, and on that account the heart of a deer 
 is reproachfully imputed to the timid, as appears 
 by this verse of Homer: "0 son of Atreus, 
 having dog's eyes and the heart of a stag.' And 
 the Apothegm of Philip of Macedon from Sto- 
 B.EUS is well known : 'an army of stags with a 
 lion for a leader, were better than an army of 
 lions with a stag for a leader.' " Forsteb. 
 
 13. Ver. 6. All her beauty is departed. -- 
 "Now they will consider well the mercies of the 
 Lord they formerly possessed, and how little they 
 had valued them. Such reflections God awakens 
 by means of affliction, and herein again is mercy, 
 though enjoyed only in the midst of tears." 
 
 DiEDRICH. 
 
 14. Ver. 7. And did mock at her Sab- 
 baths. — " A corresponding punishment (poena 
 avTiaTpo(pog) answers, by the just judgment of God, 
 to the sin of Sabbath profanation; viz., the de- 
 rision of the Sabbath (comp. Gregor. Nazianz. 
 The festivals of the people become the door of 
 sins)." FoRSTER. [Adam Clarke: " The Jews 
 were despised by the heathen for keeping the Sab- 
 bath. Juvenal mocks them on that account: 
 
 Cni septima quwque fuit lux 
 Ignava et partem vitse non attigit ullam. Sat. V. 
 
 ♦ To whom every seventh day was a blank and 
 formed not any part of their life.' St. Adgustin 
 represents Seneca as doing the same: — Inutiliter 
 id eos facere affirmans, quod septimani fermfe 
 partem setatis suae perdent vacando, et multa in 
 tempore urgentia, non agendo loedantur. ' That 
 they lost the seventh part of their life in keep- 
 ing their Sabbaths ; and injured themselves by 
 abstaining from the performance of many neces- 
 sary things in such times.' He did not consider 
 that the Roman calendar and customs gave them 
 many more idle days than God had prescribed in 
 Sabbaths to the Jews."] 
 
 15. Ver. 7. Jerusalem remembered. — 
 Sinning lir.^t and remembering afterwards has 
 brought many into great trouble. 
 
 1(3. Ver. 8. Jerusalem hath grievously- 
 sinned. — " We, Jerusalem, must suffer on ac- 
 count of our sins, and this chiefly makes our sor- 
 rows so very bitter : sin is the sting of death and 
 of every evil." Diedricii. [Calvin: " Here the 
 Prophet expresses more clearly and strongly 
 what he had briefly referred to, even that all the 
 evil which the Jews suffered proceeded from 
 God's vengeance, and that they were worthy of 
 Buch a punishment, because they had not lightly 
 oft'ended, but had heaped up for themselves a 
 dreadful judgment, since they had in all manner 
 of ways abandoned themselves to impiety. It is 
 common to all to mourn in adversities; but the 
 end of the moui-ning of the unbelieving is per- 
 verseness, which at length breaks out into rage, 
 wlien they feel their evils, and they do not in the 
 meantime humble themselves before God. But 
 the faithful do not harden themselves in their 
 mourning, but reflect on themselves and examine 
 their own life, and of tlieir own accord prostrate 
 
 themselves before God, and willingly submit t) 
 tlie sentence of condemnation, and confess that 
 God is just."] 
 
 17. Ver. 9. [Her filthiness is in her skirts. 
 — "Much of the Jewish law is employed in dis- 
 criminating between things clean and unclean ; 
 in removing and making atonement for things 
 polluted or prescribed: and under these cere- 
 monies, as under a veil or covering, a meaning 
 the most important and sacred is concealed, as 
 would be apparent from the nature of them, even 
 if we had not, besides, other clear and explicit 
 authority for this opinion. Among the rest are 
 certain diseases and infirmities of the body. * * * 
 The sacred poets sometimes have recourse to these 
 topics for imagery, even on the most momentous 
 occasions, when they display the general de- 
 pravity inherent in the human mind (Isa. Ixiv. 
 0), or exprobate the corrupt manners of their 
 own people (Isa. i. 5, 6, 16; Ez. xxxvi. 17), or 
 when they deplore the abject state of the virgin, 
 the daughter of Sion, polluted and exposed (Lam. 
 i. 8, 9, 17 ; ii. 2). If we consider these meta- 
 phors without any reference to the religion of 
 their authors, they will doubtless appear in some 
 degree disgusting and inelegant; if we refer 
 them to their genuine source, to the peculiar 
 rites of the Hebrews, they will be found wanting 
 neither in force nor in dignity." Lowth: Sacred 
 Poetry of the Hebrews, Lee. VIII.'\ 
 
 18. Ver. 9. She remembereth not her 
 last end. — "It is a peculiarity of sin, that while 
 it may rest a long time in a man's heart without 
 disturbing him, yet whenever God begins to show 
 His wrath, it wakes up and stings as a serpent 
 and makes a wound that no one can heal (Eccle- 
 siasticus xxi. 2). It would be well for us to re- 
 flect, when the devil makes sin as sweet as honey, 
 that there may be poison concealed in it." Cra- 
 mer by Eg. Hunnius {Ser. III., p. 27). [" My 
 son, hast thou sinned? Do so no more, but ask 
 pardon for thy former sins. Flee from sin as 
 from the face of a serpent ; for if thou comest 
 too near it, it will bite thee: the teeth thereof 
 are as the teeth of a lion, slaying the sotils of men. 
 All iniquity is as a two-edged sword, the wounds 
 whereof cannot be healed." Ecclesiasticus xxi. 
 1-3.] 
 
 19. Ver. 10. " If we have failed to keep dili- 
 gently the gates of our heart and through some 
 one of our senses lying open the old enemy have 
 found entrance, he advances thence by means of 
 depraved suggestions and illicit lusts into the 
 very sanctuary of our soul, where the Holy 
 Trinity used to dwell by means of true faith, and 
 he despoils that sanctuary of the wisdom and 
 virtues that beautify and embellish it, and we 
 become miserable and most deserving of being 
 overwhelmed with shame." RiiABAN. Maurcs 
 by GnisLER. p. 36. 
 
 20. Vers. 8-10. "Not the person, but the doc- 
 trine sanctifies a place, much less tan a place 
 sanctify the person and the doctrine. To which ia 
 pertinent that saying of Jeko.me in his Epistle to 
 Heliodorus, — ' It is not easy to stand in the jilace 
 of Paul and to hold the rank of Peter, both of 
 whom reign with Christ.' Whence it is said, — 
 ' They are not the sons of the saints who occupy 
 the places of the saints, but those who do their 
 works.' Wherefore if Jerusalem, the holiest of 
 
CHAP. I. 
 
 66 
 
 all cities in the judgment of God Himself, is 
 nevertheless declared in our text to be the wick- 
 edest of all cities, who will not rather say this 
 of the city of Rome, which to-day, all the world 
 knows, is the abyss of superstitions and of all 
 possible abominations." Fohster. 
 
 21. Ver. 11. See, O Lord, and consider: 
 for I am become vile. — "The righteous are 
 oppressed in the church that they may cry out. 
 they cry that they may be heard, they are heard 
 that they may glorify God." Augustin by 
 FoESTEK. [Calvin: "We said yesterday, that 
 the complaiuts which humbled the faithful, and, 
 at the same time, raised them to a good hope, and 
 also opened the door to prayers, were dictated by 
 the Spirit of God. Otherwise, when men indulge 
 in grief, and torment themselves, they become 
 exasperated ; and then to be kindled by this irri- 
 tation is a kind of madness. The Prophet, there- 
 fore, in order to moderate the intensity of sorrow, 
 and the raging of impatience, recalls again the 
 faithful to prayer. And when Jerusalem asks 
 God to see and to look, there is an emphasis in- 
 tended in using the two words ; and the reason 
 given does also more fully show this, because she 
 had become vile ; so that the church set nothing 
 else before God, to turn Him to mercy, but her 
 own miseries. She did not, then, bring forward her 
 own services, but only deplored her own miseries, 
 in order that she might obtain the favor of 
 God."] 
 
 22. [Ver. 12. Is it nothing to you, all ye 
 that pass by? behold and see if there be 
 any sorrow like unto my sorrow, w^hich 
 is done unto Me. — Henry: "She justly de- 
 mands a share in the pity and compassion of 
 spectators. How pathetically does she beg their 
 compassion ! ver. 18. This is like that of Job, 
 xix. 21. Have pity, have pity upon me, ye my 
 friends! It helps to make a burden sit lighter, 
 if our friends sympathize with us, and mingle their 
 tears with ours ; for this evinces that, though in 
 aflaiction, we are not in contempt, commonly as 
 much dreaded as anything in an aflaiction."] 
 
 23. Ver. 12. "This is allegorically expounded 
 to be the voice of Christ hanging on the cross, or 
 of souls in Purgatory. * * * Or it is the voice of 
 the church in tribulation. * * * Of the same na- 
 ture is the anguish of the mother when in labor, 
 or mourning her dead children, or dreading 
 separation from her husband, or carried captive 
 with her children among enemies. * * * It is 
 the voice of the truly penitent soul, for there is 
 no greater desolation than separation from God." 
 BoNAVENTURA by Ghisler. pp. 41, 42. 
 
 24. [Ver. 12. Henderson: "The words of 
 this verse have been very generally applied, in 
 the language of the pulpit, to the suflferings of 
 our Saviour, and unquestionably they graphi- 
 cally describe the intensity of those suflferings; 
 but considering the extent to which the original 
 sense of the passage has been lost sight of, and 
 the accommodated one substituted in its room, 
 it would be well to notify that the secondary 
 meaning is merely an accommodation of the 
 words." Wordsworth: "This sorrowful ex- 
 clamation may, in a secondary and spiritual sense, 
 be regarded as coming from the lips of Christ 
 on the cross, bewailing the sins and miseries of 
 the world, which caused Him that bitter anguish, | 
 
 5 
 
 of which alone it could be properly said, ' that 
 no sorrow was like unto His sorrow.'" Thus 
 George Herbert, in " The Sacrifice:" 
 
 " Oh all ye, who pasa by, whose eyes and mind 
 To worldly things arc sharp, but to Me blind, 
 To Me, who took eyes that I might you find : 
 Was ever grief like Mine ? 
 
 But now I die ; now all is finished. 
 
 My wo, man's weal : and now I bow My head : 
 
 Only let others say, when I am dead, 
 
 Never was grief like Mine." — W. H. H.] 
 
 25. Ver. 12. "Our Saviour could have used 
 this apostrophe on the day of the preparation for 
 the Passover, which might without impropriety 
 be called, in the very words of this text, the day 
 of the wrath and indignation of the Lord, inas- 
 much as on that day He poured out His wrath as 
 if by a sudden impulse, on His own Son, in ac 
 cordance with the testimony of Isa. liii. Speak- 
 ing briefly: the suffering of Christ was infinite 
 and infernal in regard to its atrocity, though not 
 with regard to its duration; and this should be 
 urged in refutation of the frivolous, carping ob- 
 jection of the disciples of Photinus, who with 
 most impious sophistry assert, that the passion 
 of Christ, because not eternal, could not be ex- 
 piatory of sins which are infinite in guilt. 
 Preachers ought to and can, by means of this 
 prophetical exhortation, stimulate their hearers 
 to more attentive meditation on the Lord's pas- 
 sion." FORSTEB. 
 
 26. Ver. 12. "Zion's sorrow exceeds all other 
 sorrow, for Zion is fully sensible of the nature 
 of her sin, — which is the sin of a horrible rebel 
 lion against God Himself: — and, at the same 
 time, she feels for the lost sinners, who were 
 called by her word and whom she could have 
 wished to see not lost. Zion's sorrow is fulfilled 
 and completely realized in Jesus Christ, of Him 
 have the prophets, and all saints, and all who 
 are His, interpreted it, — these know only Christ. 
 He who inflicts the sorrow is God the Father, 
 and He who bears it, in the fullest sense, is the 
 Son of God " DiEDRiCH. 
 
 27. [Ver. 13. Pool: " The holy man owneth 
 God as the first cause of all the evil they suflfered, 
 and entitles God to their various kinds of aflBic- 
 tions, both in captivity and during the siege, 
 looking beyond the Babylonians, who were the 
 proximate instrumental cause."] 
 
 28. Ver. 14. "Although it may have the ap- 
 pearance of wrath, that God should punish the 
 Jewish people so severely with servitude, famine, 
 disgrace and the contempt of their enemies, yet 
 thereby God promoted their eternal benefit, since 
 many of them were brought by these means to a 
 knowledge of their sins they had not other- 
 wise attained. Moreover, God does many a 
 'strange work' (Isa. xxviii. 21), in reference to 
 that, which He esteems His own. Example, 
 Majjasseh." Cramer by Eg. Hunnius [Ser. 
 III., pp. 28, 29).— "Oh! how salutary is the 
 blow, when God punishes a man for his sins here 
 in this life, and by such temporal punishment 
 preserves him from the future eternal and terri- 
 ble wrath of God and from unquenchable Hell- 
 fiie ! Thus that holy teacher Augustin speaks, in 
 Ids Confessions: Lord, burn me here, saw me in 
 pieces here, pierce me here, stone nie here. Only 
 spare me in that world." Eg. Hunnius, id. loc. 
 
THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 29. Ver. 14. " Punishment daily increases be- 
 cause guilt increases daily. AuGUSTiN. Sins be- 
 cause they excite the wrath of God, which is an 
 intolerable burden (Prayer of Manass., ver. 5), 
 are themselves well called, and are, a yoke and 
 an intolerable burden (Vi^. xxxviii. 4; Ixv. 4)." 
 FoiisTER. [" My transgressions, Lord, are 
 multiplied: My transgressions are multiplied, 
 and I am not worthy to behold and see the height 
 of Heaven, for the multitude of mine iniquities. 
 / am boived down ivith many iron hands, that I can- 
 not lift up mine head, neither have any release: for 
 I have provoked Thy wrath, and done evil before 
 Thee; I did not Thy will, neither kept I Thy 
 couimandments : I have set up abominations, and 
 have multiplied offences." (The Prayer of 
 .Ma.nasseh.) — Henry: "We never are entangled 
 ; 1 any yoke, but what is framed out of our own 
 I , ansgressions. The yoke of Christ's commands 
 :-; ;m easy yoke, Matt. ix. 30; that of our own 
 1 ransgressions a heavy one: God is said to bind 
 I his yoke, and nothing but the hand of His par- 
 doning mercy will unbind it."] 
 
 30. Vers. 12-15. "We should observe here, 
 what is the real source of all tribulation and ad- 
 versity on earth; namely, not blind chance, not 
 celestial agencies, not men, who err in their 
 opinions, or cause misfortunes through wanton- 
 ness or malice : in these we may find a secondary 
 cause, but the highest cause, which should be 
 first and most considered, is God. The Lord, 
 says Jeremiah, has filled me full of grief; He has 
 sent from on high a fire into my bones; the Lord 
 has so severely handled me that I am not able to 
 rise up. The Lord Himself freely confesses all 
 this and says, 'Is there evil in the city, which I, 
 the Lord, have not done?' (Am. iii. 6). There- 
 fore if we would escape evil, we must go to no 
 one but God, and see to it that we are reconciled 
 with Him in regard to our sins. Wtirtemb.: Sum- 
 mar." — [Scott : " It may properly be inquired of 
 all that pass by, whether the suffering of the 
 people of God be nothing to them ? If they have 
 no thought of compassionating or attempting to 
 alleviate their distresses, they may at least be- 
 hold and be instructed: they may see in them the 
 holiness of God, the evil of sin, the emptiness of 
 forms, the fatal effects of hypocrisy and impiety: 
 and they may take warning to flee from the 
 wrath to come, by considering the temporal 
 miseries to which sin exposes men in this world, 
 ' For if the righteous scarcely are saved, where 
 will the ungodly and profligate appear?' If the 
 rod of correction be so terrible, what will the 
 sword of vengeance be ? — But whatever may be 
 learned by viewing the desolations of Jerusalem, 
 * * * far more may be learned from looking 
 unto Jesus, and His sufferings and death. Does 
 He not, as it were from the cross, call on every 
 heedless mortal to attend to the scene ? Does 
 He not say, 'Is it nothing to you, all ye that 
 pass by ? Behold and see if there be any sorrow 
 like unto My sorrow, wherewith the Lord hath 
 afflicted Me, in the day of His fierce anger against 
 the sins of those whom I came to seek and save ? 
 Is it nothing to you that I am here a sinless suf- 
 ferer? That I, the well-beloved Son of the 
 Father, am consumed by the fire of His wrath, 
 and that My heart in the midst of my bowels is 
 even as melting wax, and all my bones out of 
 
 joint, and that mine enemies stand staring on 
 and insulting over Me? Is it nothing to you 
 that the Father hath wreathed on My neck the 
 yoke of man's transgressions, and laid on Me the 
 iniquity of all His jieople?' I say, doth not our 
 suffering Immanuel seem thus to address us? 
 And does it not behoove us to consider, who this 
 Sufferer was, what He suffered, and why He suf- 
 fered at all? Here we may see the evil of sin, 
 the honor of the law, and the justice of God, more 
 than in all the other scenes that we have been 
 contemplating : here we may learn the worth of 
 our souls, the importance of eternal things, the 
 vanity of the world, and the misery of fallen 
 man. Here we may see the only foundation of 
 our hope, and the source of our comfort and 
 happiness. Here we may learn gratitude and 
 patience, meekness and mercy, from the brightest 
 example and the most endearing motives. Let 
 then all our sorrows lead u;? to contemplate the 
 cross of Christ, and to mai'k the way He took 
 through sufferings and death to His glory ; that 
 we maybe comforted under our trials, and cheer- 
 fully follow our Fore-runner, that where He is, 
 there we may be also."] 
 
 31. [Ver. 16. Because the Comforter that 
 should relieve my soul is far from me. — 
 The church suffering for her actual sins becomes 
 a type of the Saviour suffering for the sins of the 
 church iniputatively. Here we have another cry 
 from the cross. " Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachtliair . 
 My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me ?" 
 Those who forsake God will be forsaken of Him, 
 and those who are forsaken of God, will seek in 
 vain for any other comforter, and will be left to 
 cry out with tears and lamentations and ' spread 
 forth their hands,' ver. 17, in vain, because 
 ' there is none to comfort ' them. The constant 
 allusion to an absent Comforter in this Song, see 
 vers. 2, 9, 16, 17, 21, is significant. There is 
 nothing like it in the other Songs of Lamenta- 
 tion.— W. H. H.] 
 
 32. Ver. 17. Zion spreadeth forth her 
 hands, and there is none to comfort her. 
 — "She receives compensatory puni.shment, in 
 that, having refused to hear Him, who stretched 
 out His hands (Isa. Ixv. 2), and to seek safety 
 under His wings (Matt, xxiii. 37), she herself 
 should afterwards stretch out her hands and not 
 find a comforter." Ambrose by Ghisler. p. 53. — 
 '• The ancient church (Sion) spreadeth forth her 
 hands, i. e., her legal works and carnal righteous- 
 nesses, but there is none to comfort her on account 
 of those works, for the Lord does not justify her 
 through them. But what [is the result of this 
 exhibition of her good works] ? If slie expects 
 to be justified by spreading out her hands after 
 this fashion, God hath com?nanded that her adver- 
 saries, i. e., her sins, should be round about her, 
 and her sins are much more numerous, nay with- 
 out comparison, innumerable, and her thousand 
 justifications are as if she were an unclean wo- 
 man, as a prophet elsewhere testifies, when he 
 says : ' But we are all as an unclean thing, and 
 all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags ' (Isa. 
 Ixiv. 6)." RuPERTUS Abbas by Ghisler. p. 54. 
 
 33. Ver. 18. " It is an ingenious and con- 
 siderate method of discipline, when the good God 
 would make us better and wiser, not by words, 
 but by examples in other persons. Happy arc 
 
CHAP. I. 
 
 they, who become wise thus by the misfortunes 
 of others." Cramer. — The Lord is righteous. 
 *' Here recurs a common saying, to vvhicli the 
 church bears her most illustrious testimony, in 
 the ^::une way as Mauritius the General, when 
 about to be beheaded, is said to have pronounced 
 publicly those words from Ps. cxix. : ' Just art 
 Tliou, Lord, and just are Thy judgments.' 
 FoRSTKR. [The Mauritius referred to is Mauri- 
 tius Tiberius, sometimes called St. Maurice, 
 tliough not the Saint usually so designated. Be- 
 fore lie himself was beheaded, his five sons were 
 massacred before his eyes; "and Maurice, hum- 
 bling himself under the hand of God, was heard 
 to excl.iim, ' Thou art just, Lord, and Thy 
 judgments are without partiality.' "[Encyc. Brit.) 
 — W. H. H.] 
 
 34. Ver. 19. I caUed for my lovers, but 
 they deceived me. — ■' Under God's judgments 
 we tirst learn, how foolish it was ever to have 
 expected anything good from the world, to which 
 we paid our earliest court, as Judah to Egypt, 
 and from the Princes of the world. The;/ have be- 
 trai/ed me, is ever said of all nations, whenever the 
 church has relied upon the great ones of a nation 
 as such. The world is the church's field, which 
 bears thistles and thorns. Those who trust to the 
 world must come eventually lo beggary, and thus 
 miserably prolong their lives ; whereby they may 
 possibly recover their senses." Diedrich. 
 
 3-5. Vers. 20-22. "Here the question occurs, 
 whether we may pray against our enemies, since 
 Christ says, 'Love your enemies' (Matt. v. 44)? 
 Answer : There are two kinds of enemies. Some, 
 who bear ill-will towards us personally for pri- 
 vate reasons, concern ourselves alone. When the 
 matter extends no further than lo our own per- 
 son, then should we privately commend it to 
 God, and pray for those who are ill-disposed to- 
 wards us, that God would bring them to a sense 
 of their sin; and, besides, we ought, according 
 to the injunction of Christ, to do them good, an(t 
 not return evil for evil, but rather overcome evil 
 with good (Rom. xii. 17, 21). But if our ene- 
 mies are of that sort, that they bear ill-will to 
 wards us, not for any private cause, but on ac- 
 count of matters of faith ; aiul are also opposed, 
 not only to us, but especially to God in Heaven, 
 are fighting against His holj' Word and are striv- 
 ing with eager impiety to destroy the Christian 
 church; — then indeed should we pray that God 
 would convert those who may be converted, but 
 as for those who continue ever to rage, stub- 
 bornly and maliciously, against God and His 
 church, that God would execute upon them ac- 
 cording to His own sentence judgment and right- 
 eousness (Ps. cxxxix. 19)." Cramer by Eg. Hun- 
 Nius {Ser. III., p. 36). • 
 
 36. Ver. 20. [Behold, O Lord.— Calvin : 
 "The people turn again to pray to God: and 
 what has been before said ought to be remem- 
 bered, that these lamentations of Jeremiah differ 
 from the complaints of the ungodly; because the 
 faithful first acknowledge that they are justly 
 chastised by God's hand, and secondly, they 
 trust in His mercy and implore His aid. For by 
 these two marks the church is distinguished from 
 the unbelieving, even by repentance and faith."] 
 — Fori am in distress. "Such is the dis- 
 tress which ari&"s from a disturbed conscience, 
 
 of which Ambrosius says (Lib. I., ep. 18), There 
 is no greater pain than that whicli wounds the 
 conscience with the sting of sin." Forstkr. — 
 [Abroad the sword bereaveth, at home 
 there is as death. Hugh Broughton: "Dent, 
 xxxii. They shall be brent with hunger and 
 eaten up with burning and bitter destruction: 
 without, the sword shall rot; within shall be 
 fear. St. Paul, 2 Cor. vii. 6, calletli Moses and 
 Jeremy both into mind, saying when we came 
 into Macedonia my flesh had no rest, we were 
 always in distress, without was fighting, within 
 was fear. Thus divinely honoreth he the Songs 
 of Moses and Jeremy, as having their words still 
 before him, joining Moses' prophecy with Jere- 
 my's story, and showing how the Apostles were 
 vexed in the world, as Jerusalem of the Chal- 
 deans."] 
 
 37. Ver. 21. Thou hast done it.— "It is 
 most worthy of observation, that the church in 
 tills prayer having turned towards God openly 
 declares. Thou hast done it. Whence it is plainly 
 to be inferred that all calamities are sent by God 
 
 (li^eOTe/f77TO<)." FORSTER. 
 
 38. Vers. 21, 22. " that God would let this 
 day come soon, in which the discipline of His 
 children has an end and the flames of God's wrath 
 shall consume the rods of His chastisement for- 
 ever! Then, in truth, our sins and the Devil 
 will be once for all under our feet, and the whole 
 world, which now vexes us, will descend into the 
 abyss with howling and shrieks. In the heart 
 of the Prophet, speaks also the Christ, who judges 
 the world and will make it His footstool : and if 
 we are really Christians, then we have, at the 
 same time and in full measure, both sorrows and 
 confidence ; yet often the sense of sorrow ex- 
 ceeds, so that we say, my sighs are many and my 
 heart is faint. But these sighs will be turned into 
 joy (John xvi. 20-22), for they are the birth- 
 throes of the new life and of the eternal world. 
 Happy is he who has a part therein." Diedrich. 
 
 39. Ver. 22. "Although our prayer is not a 
 work of merit on account of which God should 
 hear us, yet it is a means by which we are heard 
 (Matt. vii. 7)." Cramer. — [Calvin: "We, in 
 short, see that the faithful lay humbly their 
 prayers before God, and at the same time con- 
 fess that what they had deserved was rendered 
 to them, only they set before God their extreme 
 sorrow, straits, griefs, tears, and sighs. Then 
 the way of pacifying God is, sincerely to confess 
 that we are justly visited by His juagment, and 
 also to lie down as it were confounded, and at 
 the same time to venture to look up to Him, and 
 to rely on His mercy with confidence." — Hugh 
 Broughton: "The first alphabet row is ended in 
 the prophecy of ending the wicked kingdoms 
 which should be brought under Babel's yoke, to 
 show that all these troubles are in God's Provi- 
 dence settled in the most exquisite order for His 
 judgments."] 
 
 40. [Prayer. "Grant, Almighty God, that as 
 Thou hast hitherto dealt so mercifully with us, 
 we may anticipate Thy dreadful judgment; and 
 that if Thou shouldest more severely chastise us, 
 we may not yet fail, but that being humbled un- 
 der Thy mighty hand, we may flee to Thy mercy 
 and cherish this hope iu our hearts, that Thou 
 wilt be a Father to us, and not hesitate to call 
 
68 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 continually on Thee, until, being freed from all 
 evils, we shall at length be gathered into Thy 
 celestial kingdom, which Thine only-begotten 
 Son has procured for us by His own blood. 
 Amen." Calvin.] 
 
 HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 
 
 1. Vers. 1-11. On a fast-day, a church conse- 
 cration, a festival in commemoration of the 
 Reformation, at a Synod, or on similar occasions 
 prompting to earnest warning, the congregation 
 could be instructed, on the ground of this text, 
 that the judgment which befell the Old Testament 
 Zion by means of the Chaldeans is a wamiw; exam- 
 ple to the New Testament Zion. In doing so, it 
 would be proper to consider: 1. The original 
 glory of the Old Testament Zion, ver. 7 a. 2. 
 Her presumptuous security and temerity, ver. 9 
 a. 3. The wickedness that became prevalent in 
 consequence thereof, vers. 5 6, 8 a. 4. The judg- 
 ment of God, for that wickedness, in its details; 
 intrusion of enemies, ver. 10, desolation of the 
 city, ver. 1, captivity of the people and of the 
 Priests and Princes, vers. 3-6, discontinuance of 
 public worship, ver. 10, famine, ver. 11, triumph 
 of enemies, vers. 5, 7, 9, disgrace and misery of 
 the people, vers. 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 9. 6. The infer- 
 ence to be drawn from all this for our benefit ; 
 how that which happened to them may also happen 
 to us, (Luke xxiii. 31 ; Rom. xi. 21-23; Rev. ii. 5). 
 
 2. Ver. 12. A sermon of consolation, on the 
 occasion of a death, or other great misfortune. 
 Our text suggests remedies for great pain. These 
 are — I. Of a natural kind. 1. The sympathy of 
 all men: ' I say to you all, etc., look and see, 
 etc' 2. Comparison with the pain of others: 
 "see if there be any sorrow like unto my sor- 
 row," — where we are warned against the error 
 of supposing our pain the greatest that ever was. 
 
 and are reminded that some are more unfortu- 
 nate than ourselves. II. Of a spiritual kind. 1. 
 The Lord has inflicted the wounds. 2. The 
 Lord will heal them. [Consider, here, espe- 
 cially the active sympathy of Christ. To the 
 question 'Was ever any sorrow like unto my 
 sorrow!' we may answer, 'Yes, Christ's, and 
 greater, too?' If "His visage was so marred 
 more than any man, and His form more than the 
 sons of men," it was because, rnore than any man, 
 He was " stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted." 
 He bore the whole burden of our guilt and He suf- 
 fered its full penalty. "The Lord laid on Him 
 the iniquity of us all," and 'He bore our griefs 
 and carried our sorrows.' Why? Not only in the 
 way of atonement, but that He might be a merciful 
 High Priest, to sympathize with us and to help 
 us. See Heb. ii. 17, 18 ; iv. 15, 16.— W. H. H.] 
 
 3. Vers. 12-22. A sermon on penitence; when 
 a calamity, that may properly be considered as 
 a Divine chastisement, calls for repentance. 
 Subject: The calamily, ivhick has befallen us, con- 
 sidered in the light of Divine righteousness and love. 
 
 I. It proceeds from Divine righteousness. 1. 
 Not another, but the Lord, has ordained it 
 against us, vers. 14, 15. 2. It corresponds ex- 
 actly to whut we have deserved, vers. 14, 18. 
 
 II. It proceeds from Divine love. 1. It admo- 
 nishes us to sincere repentance. 2. It dissuades 
 us from confiding in any false hope or support, 
 vers. 13-16, 21. 3. It incites us to seek help from 
 God in a believing spirit, ver. 20. 
 
 4. Ver. 20. Floret — Biblical Guide for spiri- 
 tual funeral discourses, Leipzig, 1861, No. 385: 
 " Well is it for a distressed widow, in her agony, 
 to look to the Lord. For — 1. The Lord knows 
 thy pain, which He Himself has inflicted. 2. 
 The Lord soothes tliy pain, for He is the best 
 Comforter. 3. The Lord changes thy pain, sooner 
 or later, into a blessed experience of good." 
 
 Chapter II. 
 
 LAMENTATION OP THE POET OVER THE DESTRUCTION OF ZION : [tHE DESTRUCTION DESCRIBED AND 
 ATTRIBUTED TO JEHOVAH. W. H. H.J 
 
 city an 
 
 'TUe^rs< song expresses sorrow over the disg:race of tte city : tlie secnnd describes the terrors of the destruc 
 ,nd Temple " (CtERLAch, Intr., p. 5), and connects them with the vengeance of God. In the tirst song, the city 
 
 destruction of the 
 is the con- 
 
 Bpicuous object and Zion and the holy places appear as accessories to her former honor and her present disgrace. In the 
 second song, God's personal agency in" the calamities described is the controlling idea (see vers. 1-9, 17, 20-22), and the Tem- 
 
 ter is composed of two sections : 1. vers. 1-10, a description of the jndgment which the Lord had inflicted ; 2. vers. 12-22, 
 lamentations over this judgment. The similarity of the general structure of Songs i., ii., their division into two almost equal 
 parts the first chiefly descriptive, the second more strictly composed of lamentations, is an evidence that they were written 
 by one author, and help to compose one complete and symmetrical poem.— W. H. H.] 
 
 PAR'? L 
 Vers. 1-10. 
 J< Ver. 1. How doth the Lord cover with a cloud, in His anger, 
 The daui^hter of Zion ! 
 He, i'rora Heaven, hath cast down to the ground 
 
 The glory of Israel, 
 He remeraliL'red not His footstool. 
 In the day of His anger. 
 
 * rin an alphabetical poem, wh-^re attention is directed to the initial letters, it may not be without significance that in 
 S«niR8 1., ii., the initials of the first three word< an; similar, spelling J'X. tliat may mean hated, despised, or an enemy. In 
 ♦ " initials'of the first four wordu of i. we have n3\S, enmily.—'W. 11. ll.l 
 
CHAP. II. 1-10. «!> 
 
 '2 Ver. 2. The Lord swallowed up and spared not 
 
 All the habitations of Jacob : 
 He demolished in His wrath 
 
 The strongholds of the daughter of Judah : 
 He cast down to the ground — He polluted 
 
 The kingdom and its princes. 
 Jl Ver. 3. He broke in hot anger 
 
 Every horn of Israel. 
 He turned back His right hand 
 
 Before the rnemy. 
 And He set Jacob on fire — 
 
 As a flame of fire devoureth round about. 
 "1 Ver. 4. He bent His bow as an enemy : 
 
 He stood — with His right hand as an adversary- 
 And destroyed 
 
 All the delights of the eye. 
 In the tabernacle of the daughter of Zion 
 
 He poured out, as fire, His fury. 
 n Vee. 5. The Lord became as an enemy : 
 
 He swallowed up Israel ; 
 He swallowed up all her palaces ; 
 
 He destroyed all His strongholds : 
 And increased in the daughter of Judah 
 
 Mourning and lamentation. 
 
 *) Ver. 6. And He laid waste as a garden His tabernacle : 
 He abolished His appointed solemnities : 
 Jehovah caused to be forgotten in Zion 
 
 Appointed solemnities and Sabbath days : 
 And rejected in His furious anger 
 King and Priest. 
 t Ver. 7. The Lord cast away with disdain His altar, 
 He abhorred His Sanctuary. 
 He gave up into the enemy's hand 
 
 The walls of her palaces. 
 They shouted in Jehovah's house 
 As on a day of appointed solemnity. 
 n Ver. 8. Jehovah purposed 
 
 To destroy the wall of the daughter of Zion. 
 He stretched out a line : 
 
 He withdrew not His hand from devouring. 
 Then He caused rampart and wall to mourn j 
 They languished together. 
 to Ver. 9. Her gates have sunk into the ground : 
 He destroyed and broke her bars. 
 Her King and her Princes among the Gentiles- 
 There is no law ! 
 Her Prophets also 
 
 Find no vision from Jehovah ! 
 ♦ Ver. 10. The elders of the daughter of Zion 
 
 Sit on the ground, — they are silent, — 
 They throw up dust upon their heads, 
 
 They put on sackcloth. 
 The virgins of Jerusalem 
 
 Bow their heads to the ground. 
 
THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 ANALYSIS. 
 
 In this song, as in the preceding one, the alphabetical construction interferes with the succession of the seve- 
 ral steps and parts of the great drama in their regular order ; get, on close examination, some regard 
 to the arrangement of events, with reference to their nature and occurrence, is observable. There is 
 given, first of all, a comprehensive surveg of the whole work of destruction, vers. 1, 2. Then follow* 
 a brief recital of the events of the war, from its beginning to the capture of the city, vers. 3, 4. Then 
 is described the complete destruction of the Temple, the homes and the walls, by Xebuzaradan, four 
 weeks after the capture of the city (see Jer. lii. 18, 14), vers. 5-9 a. Thus far only the material 
 objects of the destruction are spoken of. What follows relates the .niferings of the per.'^ons icho icrre 
 involved in the catastrophe. From ver. 9 6 we learn the fate of the King, Princes and Prophets; in 
 ver. 10 we see the elders and the virgins lamenting ; in ver. 1 1 the Poet describes his oivn sufferings, 
 etc. [Naegelsbach does not recognize the very obvious division of this chapter into two parts. 
 Gerlach makes three sections, vers. 1-10, 11-19, 20-22.— The first part naturally divides itself info 
 two equal sections : vers. 1-5 contain a general description of the punishment of Zion; vers. 6-10 
 relate particularly to the destruction of Zion itself. — W. H. H. ] 
 
 11. Vers. 1, 2. 
 
 1 How hath the Lord covered the daughter of Zion with a cloud in his anger, and 
 cast down from heaven unto the earth the beauty of Israel, and remembered not 
 
 2 his footstool in the day of his anger ! The Lord hath swallowed up all the habi- 
 tations of Jacob, and hath not pitied ; he hath thrown down in his wrath the 
 strongholds of the daughter of Judah : he hath brought them down to the ground : 
 he hath polluted the kingdom and the princes thereof. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver 1.— 3"'y^ From the verbal stem, 35J^, from which is 3J^, a cloud, only this single form occurs, and this is an. Kty. 
 [13X3- Gerlach : " not ^vith wrath (Ewald), but in His wrath, as similar expressions at the close of this ver. and in vers. 2, 
 6, 21, 22, show.'"— ■'JIK- See Intr. Add. Rem. p. 32.]— IJ^bli'n — Only H'^ed in Hiph. anil Hoph.; frequent in Jeremiah, vii. 15, 
 29 ; ix. 18 ; xli. 9, etc. — V"^X- Accusative of place, in answer to the question, Wliither ? 1 Sam. xxv. 23 ; 1 Kings i. 31 ; Is. xlix. 
 23 ; Amos ix. 9 ; Ob. 3 ; Ps. cxlvii. 15 ; my Gr., § 70, 6. Jeremiah uses y"1X as accusative after verbs of going and coming 
 very frequently, xxxvii. 12 ; xl. 12 ; xlii. 1-1 ; xliii. 7, e<c.— n"lNDP- mXpH, a corresponding word, is very frequent with 
 Jeremiah, xlviii. 17 ; xiii. 11, 18 ; xxxiii. 9.— 13T. in same sense, Jer. xxxi. 20 ; xv. 15. DHO, not fouuU iu Jer.— Jeremiah 
 never says f>X DV. The only place in which he connects nx with the idea of a particular time, he says ?|3X nj^3, xviii. 
 23. The expression is found in Lam. only here and vers. 21, 22. 
 
 Ver. 2.— nbs. Jeremiah uses only Kal, and that only once, li. 34. Piel in this chapter five times, vers. 2, 5, his, 8, 16, no- 
 where else in Lam.— ['JIX- ^ne, Jntr. Add. Rem.\>.?&.]-hryr\ xS. [K'ri, X^V " The asyndeton is much used in this species 
 of verse at the half pause." Blatney.] Jeremiah uses the word Sofl, xiii. li ; xv. 5 ; xxi. 7 ; 1. 14 ; li. 3. But to express 
 the thought, which SdH x"? here represents, Jeremiah uses DPJ X'Sl, xx. 16. [With all deference, the thought in xx. 
 16 is only analogous to the thought here, which is exactly expressed in the passages first cited. This is not to be overlooked 
 in considering the peculiarities of Jeremiah's style and language.— W.H.H.]—:}p;»'_ n'lXJ occurs only here. [Blavney 
 translates fllXJ pleasant places, following the Sept., TtavTa toi i>pala, and the Latin, omnia speciosa. Douat : all that was 
 beautiful in Jacob. Thougli HXJ is used in this sense in the Piel, there is no clear case where the noun has this sense ; it 
 designates either dwellings, Ps.lxxiv. 20 ; Ixxxiii. 13, ox pasture-grounds regarded as the dwellings of shepherds and their 
 flocks Am. i. 2 • Jer. ix. 9 • xxv. 37 ; Ps. xxiii. 2 ; Ixv. 13. Fuerst translates' it here unorntected, open cities, opposite of 
 walled and fortified places.— W. H. H.]— Din Jeremiah uses frequently, i. 10 ; xxiv. 6 , xxxi. 28, ete.— He uses Hl^;' only 
 twice, vii. 29 ; xlviii. 30.— m^ir'n^ ''"l^^O- See Jer. i. 8 ; v. 17.— Sbn, Piel, occurs in Jeremiah, xvi. 18 ; xxxi. 5; 
 xxxiv. 10 ; comp. Is. xliii. 28.— ■T'ltl^l T\3^D7!i- Sept. has /3a<nXe'a avrrj^. They must have read n^/D as in ver. 9. The 
 Syriac and Arabic read so also.^ Yet^the authority of the Septuagint is much too precarious to change the readin- of tlie 
 text, which is also found in the Vnlg. and Chal. Besides, it is much easier to explain how n375, at the time iu sight at 
 ver. 9, could originate from DdSsD, than it would be to account for the reverse. 713700 in connection with T\'''^p (the 
 
 Bufflx of which refers to the former) and with reference to HIXJ and D"lV3D, is withuut doubt to be taken in the sense of 
 
 T • t; ■ 
 
 royalty=king8hip, resria /)0<e«<as. Jeremiah uses the word iu this sense, xxvii. 1 ; xxviii. 1. [Fuerst: dominion, reign, 
 kingdom.] 
 
 Zion •with a cloud in his anger. The Poet 
 lius evidently the image of a thutuler-storm in 
 liis niiiul. The wriitli of Jehovah envelops Zion 
 iu a cloud, out of which the destroying lightning 
 (see next clause) descends upon her. £Wouds- 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 1. How — see i. 1 — hath the Lord co- 
 vered — doth the Lord cover — the daughter of 
 
CHAP. II. 1, 2. 
 
 71 
 
 WORTH : " The Lord hath poured out His fury 
 on Zion, as in a tempest, and has dashed down 
 her beauty as with lightning, and has not spared 
 the Ark of His Sanctuary." Gerlach: in his 
 •wrath. " The frequent repetition of this ex- 
 pression (see at the close of vers. 3, 6, 21, 22) 
 shows that this chapter is especially intended to 
 exhibit the fury of the wrath of God against Je- 
 rusalem ; as in the first chapter the repetition of 
 the formula, indicating the absence of help and 
 comfort, corresponds to the description of the 
 extreme distress described in that chapter."] 
 The expression daughter of Zion occurs i. G, 
 and Jeremiah iv. 31 ; vi. 2, 23. — And cast 
 down from heaven unto the earth the 
 beauty of Israel. To understand this it is 
 necessary to determine first of all to whom the 
 words from heaven refer. At the first glance 
 they seem to refer to the object of the verb cast 
 down. In that case the beauty of Israel 
 would be in Heaven and from Heaven hurled 
 down to the earth. But in what sense was the 
 beauty of Israel in Heaven ? To answer this, 
 we must first know what is meant by the 
 beauty or glory of Israel. The word in the 
 original r\T5<3n, by itself, could indicate the 
 Temple which the Israelites called 'Jn^^pp r\^2 
 [lit., house of our glory ; E. V., our beautiful house'], 
 Is. liv. 10; comp. Ix. 7; Ixiii. 15; or, the ark 
 of the covenant, in reference to which the daugh- 
 ter-in-law of Eli gave to her child the name of 
 Ichabod, which is thus interpreted (1 Sam. iv. 
 21, 22), "And she named the child Ichabod, 
 [Marg.: where is the glory? or, there is no 
 glory], saying. The glory is departed from 
 Israel (because the ark of God was taken, and be- 
 cause of her father-in-law and her husband) : and 
 she said. The glory is departed from Israel ; 
 for the ark of God is taken." See Ps. Ixxviii. 61. 
 The word P^NiJil is, however, in itself too ab- 
 stract and general, and there is too little in the 
 context to fix its definition, to allow us to say 
 with confidence that it denotes in the concrete 
 any particular object. We are obliged, there- 
 fore, to acquiesce in its general sense, and to 
 understand by it the glory of Israel in general, 
 especially all that distinguishes Israel as the 
 chosen people before all peoples. All this is 
 truly, by the destruction of the Theocracy, cast 
 down to the ground. Should we now refer from 
 Heaven to the object of the verb cast dow^n, 
 then we must take it figuratively, as expressing 
 the height of the glory or beauty of Israel, 
 which is thus denoted as towering up to Heaven, 
 But Heaven D'Ol^ is never used in this figurative 
 sense in the Old Testament. The places which 
 are cited as proving such a use of the word (Gen. 
 xi. 4; Job XX. 6; Isa. xiv. 12; Dan. iv. 8 ; 2 
 Chron. xxviii. 9; comp. Gen. iv. 10) are entirely 
 irrelevant. In the New Testament only Matt, 
 xi. 23; Luke x. 15 ("and thou, Capernaum, 
 which art exalted unto Heaven," etc.) afford 
 possible analogies for such a figurative use of 
 this phrase. Therefore I believe (with Datue, 
 Kalkar and others) that from Heaven is to he 
 referred to the subject of the verb cast down: 
 the Lord from Heaven casts down the glory of l.s- 
 rael to the ground. This also suits admirably 
 the idea expressed in the verb in the first clause, 
 
 S'J^'^to cover with a cloud, under which the image 
 of a thunder-storm is suggested. From the 
 Heavens tbe Lord, by a stroke of lightning, casts 
 down the glory of Israel. From Heaven, D'Dli/p. 
 is often used in this sense. Josh. x. 11 ; 2 Sam. 
 xsii. 14; Gen. xix. 24 ; Ex. xvi. 4, etc. — And 
 remembered not His footstool in the day 
 of His anger. The ark of the covenant is ex- 
 plicitly called the footstool of Jehovah in 1 Chron. 
 xxviii. 2, where David says, " I had in mine 
 heart to build an house of rest for the ark of the 
 covenant of the Lord and for the footstool of our 
 God" ^and for the footstool. "The conjunction 
 and is exegetical, and the same with that is." So 
 says Joseph Mede in his article on Ps. cxxxii. 
 7, " We will go into His tabernacle, we will wor- 
 ship at [toivards, MedeI His footstool." — W. H. 
 H.]. The ark of the covenant may be so called, 
 because He, who is enthroned upon the cherubim 
 (2 Sam. vi. 2; Ps. Ixxx. 2; xcix. 1) [see also 1 
 Sam. iv. 4, which Mkde translates sittelh upon 
 the cherubims. — W. H. H.], has the cover of the 
 ark of the covenant [the mercy-seat] at His feet, 
 wherefore it is also said, that the Lord speaks 
 
 ^n^r"? '^"9. /'"on« above the mercy-seat, Ex. xxv. 
 22; Num. vii. 89. Therefore, without doubt, 
 the ark of the covenant is to be understood as the 
 footstool, towards which worship is said to be 
 directed in Ps. xcix. 5; cxxxii. 7. [Alexander: 
 on Ps. xcix. 5. " Exalt ye Jehovah our God, and 
 prostrate yourselves to His footstool. — Bow down 
 (or prostrate) yourselves, as an act of worship. 
 Not at His footstool, as the mere place of worship, 
 but to it, as the object, this name being constantly 
 given to the ark, 1 Chron. xxviii. 2; Lam. ii. 1; 
 Ps. cxxxii. 7; Isa. Ix. 13. Even in Isa. Ixvi. 1, 
 there is allusion to the ordinary usage of the 
 terms. The ark is here represented as the ob- 
 ject of worship, just as Zion is in Isa. xlv. 14, 
 both being put for the God who was present in 
 them." Calvin: "The design of the Prophet 
 is to show to the people how much God's wrath 
 had been kindled, when He spared not even His 
 own sanctuary. For he takes this principle as 
 granted, that God is never without reason angry, 
 and never exceeds the due measure of punish- 
 ment. As, then, God's wrath was so great that 
 He destroyed His own Temple, it was a token of 
 dreadful wi-ath. * * He (the prophet) could not 
 have better expressed to the people the heinous- 
 ness of their sins, than by laying before them 
 this fact, that God remembered 7iot His footstool in 
 the day of His anger."] — The three members of 
 the verse are so related to each other, that the 
 first exhibits Zion as completely enveloped as it 
 were in a thunder cloud, the second represents 
 the glory of Israel as destroyed by the lightning, 
 the third dwells especially on the fact, that the 
 Lord had not so much as spared the holiest of 
 holy things, the ark of the covenant. 
 
 [3''J?\ Naegelsbach translates it verdunkelt; 
 Gerlach, umivolkt; Hugh Broughton, JecZowrfer/. 
 — Owen, in a note to his translation of Calvin, 
 observes that this verb is clearly in the future 
 tense, and proposes to translate it, "Why should 
 the Lord in His wrath becloud the daughter of 
 Zion?" "Then follows," he says, "a descrip- 
 tion of what had happened to Zion, He hath cast 
 
THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 from Heaven," etc. Scott seems to take the 
 same view of the exposlulatory character of the 
 sentence, when he says, the prophet "inquires, 
 with mingled surprise and regret, how the Lord, 
 the Author of her afflictions, could be induced 
 thus to distress her ?" But it is better to take 
 the verb in the sense of the present. How doth 
 the Lord cover, etc., as Bl.vyney, Boothroyd, 
 Naegelsbach and Gerlach. The Poet "as- 
 sumes an ideal point of vision prior to" the ac- 
 tual occurrence of the event, " and so regards it 
 as future." Yet while he speaks, the thing is 
 done: and the description is completed in the 
 past tense. The future as thus used in Hebrew, 
 is best translated by the present in English. See 
 Green's Gr., § 263, 5. "The intermingling of 
 different tenses in relation to the same subject, 
 which is so frequent in poetry, foreign as it may 
 be to our modes of thought, does not justify the 
 conclusion that they are used promiscuously or 
 without regard to their distinctive signiticalion " 
 {lb. note "a."). If we accept Naegelsbach's 
 idea of the thunder-cloud and the lightning, the 
 use of the future in the first verb is very forci- 
 ble. The Poet sees the cloud gathering, and 
 while he looks, the lightning has flashed and the 
 work of destruction is complete. — Aben-Ezra, 
 according to Rosenmueller, see also Calvin, 
 explains the word to mean lifted up to the clouds. 
 God exalted the daughter of Zion to the clouds, 
 ''in His wrath,'' i\in.t He might cast her down 
 from a greater height. " For when one wishes 
 to break in pieces an earthen vessel, he not only 
 casts it on the ground, but he raises it up, that 
 it may be thrown down with greater force " 
 (Calvin). We need some evidence better than 
 this ingenious argument that the word can have 
 this meaning.— The Chald. and Syr., Gesenius 
 in his Thes., Maurer and J. D. Michaelis trans- 
 late the word sprevit, contumelia vel opprohrio af- 
 fecit, dishonored, disgraced, finding for this sense an 
 analogy in the Arabic. The principal argument 
 for this is, that he who is thrown down from 
 Heaven is not surrounded with clouds. We an- 
 swer 1. According to Naegelsbach above, "from 
 Heaven" refers to the subject and not to the ob- 
 ject of the verb " cast down." 2. The figure 
 of the thunder-cloud implies rather that the 
 cloud covered the doomed City and Temple, and 
 not that they weie lifted up into the clouds. 3. 
 There are two subjects expressed, as well as two 
 verbs. Not the daughter of Zion, but the glory of 
 Israel is cast down to the ground. — Gerlach 
 gives a poetical explanation to the first two 
 clauses, " Jerusalem is compared to a star, that 
 once shone brightly, but was first clouded over 
 and then thrown to the earth:" and seems to 
 imagine an allusion to Isa. xiv. 12. But his 
 beautiful star shines only in his fancy, and not 
 in the text. 
 
 Ver. 2. The Lord hath swallowed up. — 
 The Poet has in mind the idea of a yawning 
 abyss. See Ex. xv. 12; Num. xvi. 30-32; xxvi. 
 10; Deut. xi. 6; Ps. cvi. 17. [All the English 
 versions translate the verb .fwallvioed up, except 
 Henderson {destroyed) and the Uouay {The Lord 
 hath cast down headlong, from \\x\gdi,i&,pTecipitavit). 
 
 Yet it seems manifest, from the use of the same 
 word in vers. 5, 8, 16 (see also Hab. i. 13 ; Isa. 
 XXV. 7, 8; xlix. 19; 2 Sam. xx. 19), that the 
 word is used merely to signify utter destruction, 
 without intending to suggest, even in a figurative 
 sense, the exact method of destruction, as by such 
 "a yawning abyss" as is referred to in passages 
 cited by Naegelsbach. Gerlach has destroyed, 
 vertilgt, Calvin also, perdidit. — W. H. H.] — All 
 the habitations of Jacob. The word ren- 
 dered habitations includes the ide;is of dwellings 
 and pasture-grounds. It indicates the places 
 where the Nomadic spread his tent and allowed 
 his flock to graze. Hence the frequent phrase 
 ■^SIO niX3 [lit. dwellings of pasture-land^, Ps. 
 IxV. 13; Jer. ix. 9; xxiii. 10; Joel i. 19, 20: ii. 
 22. And hath not pitied. See vers. 17. 21 ; 
 iii. 43. And spared not. [So the Sept. and Vulg. 
 E. V. pitied, is most in accordance with the use 
 of the worfl: yet the idea of sparing, in the exer- 
 cise of mercy, is suggested by the order of the 
 words in the original. The Lord swallowed up 
 and spared not all the habitations of Jacob. So 
 Calvin, Brougiiton, Gerlach. — W. H. H.] — 
 He hath thrown dow^n — demolished, in His 
 wrath the strongholds of the daughter of 
 Judah. The strongholds of Judah stand in anti- 
 thesis to the habitations of Jacob; not only the 
 open unprotected places, where the people dwelt 
 among their pasture and grazing lands, but also 
 the fortified cities were visited with destruction. 
 — The daughter of Judah, see i. 15; ii. 5. 
 The expression is very suitable, since only Judah 
 still had any strongholds. See Jer. xxxiv. 7. — 
 He hath brought them down to the ground: 
 He hath polluted the kingdom and the 
 princes thereof. He cast down to the ground. 
 He polluted the kingdom and its princes. The ex- 
 pression y^.X^ .?^-''7' ^^ bring down to the ground, 
 is used very explicitly of fortified places in Isa. 
 XXV. 12; xxvi. 5, comp. Ezek. xiii. 14. Yet to refer 
 it here to what precedes, results in a troublesome 
 asyndeton. Then, too, the structure of the verse 
 would be irregular, for the second idea and 
 clause of the verse would have three lines or 
 members, and the third only one. Finally, there 
 is an idea in bringing down to the ground [or made 
 to touch the ground; margin, E. V.J, akin to that 
 of pollution, which immediately follows. For 
 majesty is polluted by being brought into con- 
 tact with common dust. Compare Ps. Ixxxix. 40, 
 
 ''■'^ X"^)^ ^'T^H. "Thou hast profaned his 
 crown, by casting it to the ground." [In favor 
 of Naegelsbacii's construction is 1. the absence 
 of the conjunction. 2. The prevailing meaning 
 
 of the verb ^JJ followed by 7, to touch, to come 
 in contact with. 3. The natural division of the 
 verse. 4. Tlie excellent sense. This construc- 
 tion is adopted by Rosenmueller, Ewald, Neu- 
 mann, Blayney and Noyes. The only objections 
 to it are 1, the application of the phrase brought 
 down to the ground, in Isaiah, to the razing of 
 fortified places; and 2, which is a stronger ob- 
 jection, the Masoretic punctuation. — W. H. H.] 
 
CHAP. II. 3, 4. 
 
 II. 3, 4. 
 
 He hath cut off ia hia fierce anger all the horn of Israel : he hath drawn back 
 his right hand from before the enemy, and he burned against Jacob like a flaming 
 fire, ivhich devoureth round about. He hath bent his bow like au enemy : he stood 
 with his right hand as an adversary, and slew all that were pleasant to the eye in 
 the tabernacle of the daughter of Zion : he poured out his fury like fire. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAI.. 
 
 Ver. 3. — V']^. Only the Niph. is found in Jer., xlviii. 25 ; 1. 23. — fjX-^in, not in Jeremiah. — n3n7> Jer. xlviii. 45. — 
 
 3'3D ri/DN, see Jer. xxi. 14; xlvi. 14; 1. 32. Jeremiah always employs as the object of 73X in this sense, D''3''^D or 
 . • T T : |t - t • • : 
 
 Ver. 4. — ntyp ^^'l, Jer. ix. 2 ; xlvi. 9 ; 1. 14, 29 ; li. 3. — There is no sufficient reason for questioning the pointing of 
 32f J IS Part. Niph. It is in apposition with li')^, [32f J is used of God's coming in judgment in Isa. iii. 13; Ps. Ixxxii. 1. 
 Its close conuection by 1 with the next verb slioulJ not be unobserved. He stood or set Himself — His right hand as an ad- 
 versary — and slew, etc. — W. H. H.] Jeremiah never uses the Niph. 32fJ, only the Hiph., v. 26; xxxi. 21, and Hithp., xlvi. 
 
 T • 
 4, 14. — The verb y^T\ (see Lam. ii. 20, 21 ; iii. 43), is scarcely current with Jeremiah. He uses only the Part. (xxxi. 21) and 
 
 Inf. Kal. (xv. 3). [Lowth, Prelim. Dissert, on Isaiah, and Blatnet supply after this verb "IJ^J-^D, every youth, from the 
 
 Chaldee Paraphrase, to supply an apparent defect in metre. — W. H. H.] — The expression "-y r\2 /TMi occurs only here. — 
 
 [The recurrence in Jeremiah of the figures of bending the how and of pouring out fury as liquid fire (see Jer. iv. 4 ; vii. 20 ; 
 xxi. 12 ; xlii. 18 ; xliv. 6) may be regarded as evidences of authorship. — W. H. H.] 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Vers. 3, 4. When it is here said that the Lord 
 had broken the horn of Israel, then that He had 
 deprived him of his right hand, then that He had 
 kindled a fire in Jacob, and as an enemy had as- 
 saulted him, it is evident that a climax is in- 
 tended. There is described first the deprivation 
 of the power of resistance, then the deprivation 
 of help, then the progress to positive hostility. 
 Thenius sees in vers. 8, 4 a full statement of all 
 the incidents of the war, from the capture of the 
 frontier fortresses to the taking of the city by 
 storm. He understands, therefore, by the horn 
 of Israel, "those places of defence which were 
 prominent, like horns, consequently frontier 
 fortresses;" hath drawn back his right hand, etc. 
 describes the retreat of the Jewish armies to the 
 capital; he burned against Jacob, etc., the effusion 
 of the hostile troops over the land of which they 
 were to become masters; he hath bent his bow, etc., 
 the institution of siege; he stood with his right 
 hand, etc., and slew, etc., the assault and storming 
 of the city; he poured out his fury like fire, the 
 capture of the city. Some of this hits the true 
 sense, but not all. That horn should indicate the 
 frontier fortresses, is artificial li is to be con- 
 sidered, too, that the phrase is y^p Sb, all the 
 horn [it may mean, however, every horn: the ab- 
 sence of the article makes this sense most pro- 
 bable. ^W. H. H,] To draw back the bow would 
 not indicate the first attack of the city, for that 
 attack was not made with arrows only. To stand 
 with the right hand as an adversary does not mean 
 to begin to fight with the right hand, and does 
 not therefore describe an exclusively hand to 
 hand fight. Certainly, as already remarked, the 
 description advances from merely negative to di- 
 rectly positive hostility, but the latter is de- 
 scribed, not by the successive steps of the siege, 
 
 but according to the various and — as far as 
 practicable — simultaneous events of the achieve- 
 ment, wherein the most impressive event, repre- 
 senting, of course, the end, is placed last of all. 
 Ver. 3. He hath cut off — He broke — in his 
 fierce anger — in hot anger. See Ex. xi. 8; 
 Deut. xxix. 23; Is. vii. 4; 1 Sam. xx. 34; 2 
 Chron. xxv. 10. [The pronoun his supplied in 
 E. V. is unnecessary, and weakens the sense. 
 There is a rhetorical climax in the words — 
 anger, ^X, ver. 1; wrath, H^^^, ver. 2; and heat 
 of anger, or hot, fierce, furious anger, ^N"'"!!!. 
 ver. 3.— W. H. H.]— AU the horn of Israel— 
 Every horn of Israel. See Jer. xlviii. 25; Ps. 
 Ixxv. 11. According to constant usage, the horn 
 is a symbol of power ; see Ps. xviii. 3 ; Ixxv. 5, 
 6, etc. [Calvin: "We know that by horn is 
 meant strength as well as excellency or dignity; 
 and I am disposed to include both here, though 
 the word breaking seems rather to refer to 
 strength or power." ]!ioYEs:'' every horn, i. e., 
 all her means of defence."] — He hath drawn 
 back — He bent back — his right hand from be- 
 fore the enemy. Dues the pronominal suffix 
 his, in JJ'P', his hand, refer to Jehovah, or to 
 Israel ? Grammatically either is possible, and 
 the sense in either case is substaniially (he same. 
 The answer must depend on which interpretation 
 best agrees with the usage of speech. The ex- 
 pression in full, as it is here, is found nowhere 
 else in the Old Testament. It is worthy of re- 
 mark that Jeremiah never uses yo^^right hand, 
 in a figurative sense. The word occurs tst. his 
 book only once, xxii. 24, and then in its literal 
 sense. The only places that can be adduced as 
 parallel to this place are, on the one side, Ps. 
 Ixxiv 11 (with reference, perhaps, to the ex- 
 pression ^nr n'!|£OJ — a stretched-out arm, Ex. vi. 
 6, and elsewhere), and on the other side, Ps. 
 xliv. 11; Ixxxix. 43, 44; comp. Is. xli. 13 
 
74 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 Whilst the first named passage distinctly ex- 
 presses the thought that Jehovah draws back 
 His hand, and that His right hand, the other 
 passages declare that the Lord let the people or 
 the edge of the sword fall back from before their 
 enemy. It seems to me that in our passage the 
 
 word linX, back, backward, standing in connection 
 
 . t' ' ' ° _ 
 
 with 3'1X 'JSp, before the enemy, decides for the 
 latter meaning. For in Ps. Ixxiv. 11 it is merely 
 ^1' 2''\pr\, thou zviihdrawest thy hand. Here the 
 ■^inX, backward, must change the sense. Draw- 
 ing back the hand is merely the opposite of 
 stretching it out (n'^tOJ ^T^I) and an act of voli- 
 tion consistent with the possession of strength. 
 But falling back before the enemy is a symptom 
 of weakness, which could not be asserted of the 
 hand of Jehovah. As it is said elsewhere that 
 Jehovah strengthens the right hand (Is. xli. 13), 
 or elevates it (Ps. Ixxxix. 43), so it can be said 
 that He lets it fall back (as if it had become 
 weak), and this falling back of the right hand is 
 the same, as is elsewhere explained, as a falling 
 back of the person generally (Ps. xliv. 11), or 
 of the sword (held by the right hand, Ps. Ixxxix. 
 44). [Owen (in a note on Calvin) : " Gataker, 
 Henry, Blayney, and Henderson, consider the 
 right hand as that of Israel — that God drew back 
 or restrained the right hand of Israel, so that 
 he had no power to face his enemies. But Scott 
 agrees with Calvin ; and favorable to the same 
 view are the early versions, except the Syr., for 
 they render the pronoun his own, suam ; the 
 Targ. also takes the same view. Had the word 
 been hand, it might have been applied to Israel; 
 but it is the right hand, which commonly means 
 protection, or rather God's power, as put forth 
 to defend His people and to resist enemies. This 
 is farther confirmed by what is said in the fol- 
 lowing verse, that God stood with His right hand 
 as an enemy. See Ps. Ixxiv. 11." Gataker's 
 argument, in Assembly's Annotations, on the other 
 side, is very strongly put, and agrees in its main 
 points with Naegelsbach's. Yet, for the follow- 
 ing reasons, it seems necessary to stand by the 
 versions and interpreters that refer the pronoun 
 to God. 1. The pronoun usually belongs to the 
 subject of the verb where its personal object is 
 not specified. By adhering to this rule, we 
 would often escape uncertainty and confusion. 
 2. After such an introduction as in ver. 1, Hotv 
 hath the Lord done all this, and the subsequent 
 use of His with reference to God (ver. 1, His an- 
 ger, twice. His footstool ; ver. 2, His wrath ; ver. 
 4, His bow. His right hand, His fury, etc.), it 
 certainly seems arbitrary and violent in this in- 
 etance to refer it to another subject. 3. It is 
 awkward, to say the least, to make his right hand 
 in ver. 3 mean one thing, and in ver. 4 another. 
 4, Throughout this whole passage, vers. 1-10, 
 the pcoplu of Israel are reprosenicd as passive 
 objects of Divine wrath, and no allusion is made 
 to the slightest activity on their part in resisting 
 the instruments of wrath, as would be done here 
 if his refers to Israel. 5. This makes excellent 
 sense, and preserves the continuity of the 
 thought, verging as usual towards a climax. 
 God breaks off the horn of Israel, that they can 
 no longer oppose their enemies ; He bends back 
 
 His own right hand, and thus withdraws His own 
 opposition to those enemies; and while Israel 
 lies thus helpless in themselves and deprived of 
 God's help. He pours down upon them the fiei'V 
 fury of His own wrath, and becomes Hiuiseii 
 like an enemy fighting against them. The bcmi- 
 ing back of His hand may be intended to express 
 God's resistance to His own merciful impulses 
 towards His own people. He forcibly bends 
 back the hand He had already stretched out in 
 Israel's behalf.— W. H. H.]— And he burned 
 against Jacob like a flaming fire, vchich 
 devoureth round about — And He set Jacob on 
 fire, as a flame of fire ivhich devours round about 
 [«'. c. He, as a flame of fire which consumes all 
 around it, set Jacob on fire]. "^^2 with 3 of the 
 object is so often used in the signification of set- 
 ting on fire, then of consuming by fire (Num. xi. 
 1, 3; Is. XXX. 33; xlii. 25; xliii. 2; Jer. xliv. 
 6; Job i. 16; Ps. cvi. 18), that we may take it 
 here unhesitatingly in the same sense. This, in- 
 deed, is the only admissible sense. For should 
 
 we take in Jacob, 3pJ7''3, in a local sense, we 
 must still understand "^^y, of the kindling of 
 the fire, in which sense only is the Piel used 
 (comp. Ex. XXXV. 3; Jer. vii. 18; Ezek. xxi. 4). 
 Then, too, we see the force of the particle of 
 comparison, tJ'XZ), like a flame. Evidently the 
 meaning is that the Lord had become to Jacob as 
 a flaming fire. He had become so by kindling 
 the consuming fire of war in the land. See Deut. 
 xxxii. 22. 
 
 Ver. 4. He hath bent His bow like an 
 enemy. The Lord attacks Israel with all kinds 
 of weapons: and so with the bow. Comp. Ps. 
 vii. 13 ; Deut. xxxii. 23. [Calvin: "Stating a 
 part for the whole, he includes in the bow every 
 other weapon."' Kitto : "The Hebraism for 
 boio is like that for bread. As the latter includes 
 all food, so does the former include all weapons." 
 {Daily Bib. 111., Vol. 3, p. 295.)— He stood 
 •with His right hand as an adversary. He 
 stood at his right hand as an adversary. We can- 
 not take his right hand as the subject of the 
 verb (3-^J) — -erecta est manus ejus instar hostis 
 (Kalkar) \_His right hand stood erect like an ad- 
 versary, Blayney] — for neither does the verb 
 mean to be erected, raised up, nor does its gen- 
 der allow this construction. I think it also in- 
 correct to take his right hand as the accusative of 
 the instrument, as Thenius, Vaihinger and 
 others do. For to stand with the right hand as an 
 adversary is an unusually odd expression, with 
 no example to sustain it. Ewald would give to 
 the verb 2^} the meaning of taking aim at some- 
 thing. [So Henderson: He hath steadied His 
 right hand like an adversary. "The point of the 
 comparison here is obviously that of the care 
 taken by the archer to obtain a steady aim."] 
 Ewald appeals to Ps. xi. 8, but the phraseology 
 in that place is entirely different. I think that 
 passages like Ps. cix. G ; Zech. iii. 1 illustrate 
 this. In those places the enemy is represented 
 as standing at the right hand. As it is said else- 
 where that the friend and helper stands at the 
 right hand, in order to support and strengthen 
 the right hand (Ps. xvi. 8; Ixxiii. 23; cix. 31; 
 ex. 5 ; cxxi. 5 ; Is. xli. 13), so it is also said that 
 
CHAP. II. 5. 
 
 the enemy places himself at the right hand, in 
 order, by hemming it in and weakening it, to 
 overcome its resistance. That U'O], his right hand, 
 has to be taljen as an accusative of place, is no 
 objection (see my Gr., ^70, c; Ex. xxxiii. 8), 
 though elsewhere a preposition is used (see the 
 places above referred to, Ps. cix. 6 ; Zech. iii. 1 
 and Ps. xlv. 10). [The ingenious reference of 
 his right hand to Israel is peculiar to our author: 
 though ChaldvEus, as quoted by Rosenmueller, 
 adopts a similar construction, but with reference 
 to the enemies of Israel: — "He has placed Him- 
 self at the right hand of Nebuchadnezzar, in or- 
 der to assist him." Besides the absence of the 
 preposition which this interpretation would seem 
 to require, a very strong objection to it is the 
 sudden change of person. For the principal 
 reasons for supposing the right hand in ver. 3 re- 
 fers to God, because God is the subject of the 
 preceding clause, and no other person is speci- 
 fied, we believe the right hind in ver. 4 also re- 
 fers to God ; if his bow means God's bow, and not 
 Israel's, then his right hand would naturally mean 
 God's, and not Israel's, or Nebuchadnezzar's, or 
 any other person's. It is not necessary, how- 
 ever, to violate grammar by giving to the Niphal 
 participle an active or perfect sense, as Ewald 
 and others have done. We can translate literally 
 thus : He stood, or was standing, or set Himself — 
 His right hand as an adversary. The ellipsis is 
 characteristic of Hebrew poetry, and may be 
 supplied by quoad, as to, or exegetically with, as 
 in our version : He stood with His right hand as 
 
 an adversary. Wordsworth: "The Prophet 
 first has a general view of the awful form of the 
 Almighty, and then beholds His Right Hand put- 
 ting itself forth as an enemy against Sion." Ro- 
 SENMUELLER : " He lias placed Himself as regards 
 His right hand, as if with it He would hurl at me 
 a juveln." See Gerlach also. — W. H. H ] — 
 And slew all that were pleasant to the 
 eye — And destroyed all that charms or delights the 
 eye. The delights of the eye (see i. 7, 10, 1 i ) 
 are evidently those in whom the eyes of parents 
 t;ike the greatest deli.K'it, tho virgins and tlie 
 young vien, i. 18. [Calvin : He slew all the chosen 
 men. It is better to take the verb I'^Ti, to hdl, 
 slay, metaphorically, as in Ps. Ixxviii. 47, lor 
 destroy (Hendersun). — W. H. H.] — In the ta- 
 bernacle of the daughter of Zion. If the 
 daughter of Zion is the body of the inhabitants 
 of Zion, then the tabernacle of the daughter of 
 Zion is the dwelling-place of those inhabitants, 
 i. e., the city. [These words are connected with 
 what follows, not with the preceding clause : 
 In the tabernacle of the daughter of Sion poured He 
 out like fire His furx). So Blayney, Gerlach, 
 Naegelsbach. Calvin prefers it. The Maso- 
 rotic punctuation requires it. — W. H. H.] — He 
 poured out His fury like fire. The figura- 
 tive idea of the outpouring of wrath, conceived 
 of as liquid fire, is found elsewhere in iv. 11 ; 
 Hos. v: 10; Jer. vi. 11 ; x. 25; xlii. 18 ; comp. 
 xiv. 16. That the Poet would indicate the cap- 
 ture and destruction of the city, is clear. 
 
 II. 5. 
 
 5 The Lord was as an enemy : he hath swallowed up Israel, he hath swallowed up 
 all her palaces ; he hath destroyed his strongholds, and hath increased in the daughter 
 of Judah mourning and lamentation. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 Ver. 5. — I'lmX, in Lam. only here and ver. 7. Often in Jeremiah, vi. 5 ; ix. 20, etc. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 According to Jer. Iii. 13, 14 (see also 6, 12), 
 four weeks after the capture, Nebuzaradan had 
 burned 'the house of Jehovah, the house of the 
 king, all the houses of Jerusalem, and every 
 great house,' and destroyed the walls. To these 
 facts vers. 5-9 a seem to refer, though they relate 
 only to the destruction of the palaces, the holy 
 places and tlie walls. [The particular descrip- 
 tion of destruction of holy places begins at ver. 
 6.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 5. The Lord was as an enemy. The Lord 
 became as an enemy. This is specified, first of all, 
 as the cause of these calamities. As an enemy, 
 
 see ver. 4, and HJO 7N3 as a widow, i. 1. — He 
 
 TT : - : ' 
 
 hath swallow^ed up (see ver. 2) Israel, He 
 hath svyallow^ed up all her palaces ; He 
 hath destroyed his strongholds, hmol, on 
 tne one part, and the palaces and strongholds, on 
 
 the other, are to each other as the people and the 
 city. Palaces here, as remarked, seem to corres- 
 pond to "the king's house" and "all the houses 
 of the great men," or "every great house," 
 
 Sl'lJn n'3-S2) in Jer. Iii. 13. Strongholds, see 
 ver. 2. — He hath destroyed his strong- 
 holds, is a quotation from Jer. xlviii. 18. Com- 
 mentators differ with respect to the sufiixes in 
 n'riijO'^X, her palaces, and VIVJD, his strong- 
 holds. Some think the feminine suifix her refers 
 to the daughter of Zion, ver. 4, the masculine 
 suffix his to Israel. Others think that Israel 
 itself may be conceived of, at one time as the 
 name of the country, at another as the name of 
 the city. [This is the opinion of Gerlach, who re- 
 fers to avery similar instance in Hos. viii. 14, where 
 the feminine suffix is attached to the same word as 
 here, n'jHIjnjTN, her palaces, and where, as here 
 the masculine would be expected. — W. H. H ] 
 J. D. MiCHAELis would read H"' r\'\^~)~}'^, palaces of 
 
76 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 Jehovah. Thenits conjectures that H'-, her, has 
 been changed into V", his, by the omission of a 
 stroke of the pen. But all the commentators, so 
 far as I see, have ovurlookeil the fact that the 
 last words are a quotation. lu this way we easily 
 explain the masculine suffix, which not only dis- 
 agrees with her palaces, but violates the rule by 
 which, every where else in the Lainentationsi, 
 Zion is conceived of as a female person. The 
 word is either a very old scribal error for Ij^lVir^p, 
 thy strongholds (yet the Sept. has ra bxoptjfiara 
 ahrov), or the Poet has chosen the suffix that best 
 preserved the similarity of sound with the origi- 
 nal text. He could do this in virtue of the greater 
 freedom which prevails in the Hebrew with re- 
 spect to denoting the gender. See my Gr., g 60, 
 4. As in Ezek. xxiii. 36-49, where Aholah and 
 Aholibah are spoken of, the suffixes are con- 
 stantly changed (see especially ver. 46) ; so here 
 also possibly, the suffixes are changed even after 
 a masculine or feminine idea floated before the 
 mind of the Poet. [The mere recurrence of two 
 not very remarkable words in succession, can 
 hardly be regarded as a quotation. But unfor- 
 tunately there is in the present instance a dis- 
 similarity which is very prejudicial to the idea 
 of a quotation. Here we read V^^DO nnt^; in 
 
 Jer. xlviii. 18 it is T'^^^'^ nrWif, and our author 
 •iTT : • 
 
 is obliged to suppose a possible scribal error, or 
 to invent an auricular theory of quotation. It 
 seems necessary here to adopt the opinion of 
 those who, according to Rosenmueller, refer 
 the masculine suffix to God and tlie feminine to 
 the daughter of Zion. He swalloiccd up all her 
 palaces, lie destroyed [lis own strongholds. This 
 is not to be discarded as a mere co7jJecture where 
 every other mode of interpretation is purely con- 
 jectural. It is recommended by the arguments 
 adduced for the explanation of his in vei'. 3. It 
 avoids the difficulty of supposing that pronouns 
 of different genders refer to the same person. 
 The her refers to the ideal person Israel, the 
 daughter of Jerusalem. Her palaces are the 
 habitations of the people. His own strongholds 
 are the defences of Zion which is His habitation. 
 Grammar and Rhetoric both coiiiMiend this ex- 
 planation. — W. H. H.] — And hath increased 
 or multiplied in the daughter of Judah, see 
 i. 15, mourning and lamentation. The last 
 words in the original are a beautiful paronomasia, 
 borrowed from Is. xxix. 2, ri'JXI rT'JXn. THen- 
 
 T— ;|- T--:|- L 
 
 derson: "Sorrow and sadness." Vitringa: 
 Moeror ac moestitia. Gerlach: Betriibniss und 
 Trobsal. Naegelsbach: ^chzen und Krdchzen'\. 
 See ^nin inn. Gen. i. 2; HNtl'pi DNIK^, Job xxx. 
 10 ; n3C?pi nopiJ^, Ez. XXXV. 3. 
 
 II. 6, 7. 
 
 6 And he hath violently taken away his tabernacle, as if it were of a garden ; he 
 hath destroyed his places of the assembly : the Lord hath caused the solemn feasts 
 and Sabbaths to be forgotten in Zion, and hath despised, in the indignation of his 
 
 7 anger, the king and the priest. The Lord has cast off his altar, he hath abhorred 
 his sanctuary, he hath given up into the hand of the enemy the walls of her palaces ; 
 they have made a noise in the house of the Lord, as in the day of a solemn feast. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 6.— The verb DDfl is found in Jer. xxii. 3; xiii. 22.— 7]tJ? for :]b, see Crit. note below.— The definite article in -jJS 
 
 is in accordance with recognized pliilological usage. See my Gr., § 71, 4 a. Drechsler, Is., Vol. ii., p. 203 n. [The definite 
 article was used in comparisons because " the Hebrew commonly conceived of the whole class of objects ot which he spoke. 
 See Green's Gr., I 245, 5 d.— W. H. H.]— nj7'lO, the first time is used of festival place (see Ps. Ixxiv. 8 ; comp. 1 Sam. xx. 
 35), and then of the festival itself (see i. 4). [See Ont. note fcetow.]- HDE?. This Piel form is found only here. It must be 
 taken in the accusative sense.— n3ty occurs in Jeremiah only in xvii. 21-27, where the profanation of the Sabbath is referred 
 to.— VXJ, in Lamentations only here ; in Jer. xiv. 21 ; xxiii. 17 ; xxxiii. 24.- D^I, in Lamentations only here ; in Jer. x. 10 ; 
 
 ' Ve'r. Vr njl, three times in Lam., ii. 7; iii. 17, 31, never in Jeremiah.— "'JIX, see i. 14 [Introd. Add. Rem. p. 32].— 
 IXJ. This verb is found only here and in Ps. Ixxxix. 40. [Blaynet renders it as Niph., His sanctuary is accursed, but con- 
 jectures from Sept., inreTiva^tv, the true reading may be I^J, X substituted for ^, Be hath shaken off His Sanctuary. As 
 the meaning could only be conjectured from the ancient versions (see Alexanber, Ps. Ixxxix. 40), it is not improbable that the 
 Sept. gave it the sense of i;; J. So Broughton, cast off, and Calvi.n, repulit vel reje.cit procul ah ammo sua. The funda- 
 mental signification of the ve^rb is to reject, to repudiate. Fukrst gives the Piel sense, to cast down entirely, to repudiate, to 
 ryVct. This agrees with the accepted translation of Ps. Ixxxix. 40. The sense of nhhor, derived from a coj^nate Arabic root, 
 would suit that place, as well as this ; and is more agreeable to the corresponding word in the first clause, n JI. 'f the f iinda- 
 
 Hiental idea of HJI is to be foul, to stink, as Gesenius says, though Puerst, with good reason, denies this. The idea of a*- 
 
 horrimi or oirejejing with disdain or disgust, is given to both these verbs by NAEGELSBAcn and GERi.Acn. Naeoelsbach 
 translates. The Lord rejected with disdain Bis altar. Be alihorred Bis sanctuary, and Gurlach just reverses the expressions. 
 The. Lord abhorred Bis altar. Be rejected with disdain Bis sanctuary.— W. U. II.]— ^-iprD, See i. 10; ii. 20, twice in Jere- 
 miah, xvii. 12 ; Ii. .'il.- lUDH, see 1 Sam. xxiii. 20; Ps. xxxi. 0, is not found in Jeremiah. The only part of the verb he 
 uses i.i the Pual, and that' only once, xiU. 19. [Nabqblsbach translates this verb " verschloss," shut up, see marg., E. V, 
 
CHAF. II. 6, 7. 
 
 He makes no remark upon its meaning. Fuerst regards *1JD to surround, enclose, Hiph. to shut up, and "1 JQ to Jlow out, 
 
 -T -T 
 
 Hiph. to deliver up, as entirely distinct Terbs, and says tViat " all attempts to unite their meanings must be regarded al 
 
 failures." — W. H. II.] — n'mjD'^X. The connection requires us to understand this of the sanctuary, altliougli no place can 
 
 be cited in which |iD*1X is used of the Temple ; for Jer. xxx. 18, to which some appeal, is to be explained otherwise : Se« 
 
 notes on that place. J. D. Michaelis would read, JV fi'lJOIK) palace of Jehovah.— ^^JM 1)[), see Jer. xxii. 
 
 T : : - :|T I 
 
 .20. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 [Vers. 6-10 describe particularly the destruc- 
 tion of the holy places. Here God claims a 
 special property. Everything is His. The em- 
 phatic use of the pronoun, shows that it is also 
 significant in ver. 5, his strongholds as distin- 
 guished from her palaces. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 6. And He hath violently taken 
 av/ay His tabernacle (marg., hedge) as if it 
 were of a garden. And He laid waste as a gar- 
 den His tabernacle. The meaning of the verb is 
 to use violence, to offer violence. To do violence to 
 a garden is to lay it waste. The laying waste of 
 a garden has these peculiarities ; it is easily done, 
 it is in some sense a crime against nature, and 
 for that reason a garden laid waste is a revolting 
 as well as a sad spectacle. — But what is the 
 meaning of the word 'J|iJ', translated tabernacle 
 
 (marg., hedge) ? That it stands for '^D, cannot be 
 
 doubted. "^D constantly denotes that sort of 
 (hiitte) hut, cot, bower, that is made of wicker- 
 work [or plaited twigs, boughs], also lairs of 
 beasts similarly constructed, Jer. xxv. 88 ; Ps. 
 X. 9. [J. A. Alexander: " The Hebrew word is 
 commonly applied to any temporary shed or 
 booth, composed of leaves and branches." But, 
 according to Fuerst, the word is derived from 
 '^^=io protect, and means properly, "the cover- 
 ing, protecting, screening thing (not a thing 
 woven together out of branches) hence a covering, 
 hut, tent; a covert, lair.'' — W. H. H.] Then it 
 denotes a house generally, and especially the 
 holy tabernacle, Jehovah's house, Ps. Ixxvi. 3 ; 
 as does also 5130, Ps. xviii. 12; Job xxxvi. 29: 
 comp. DI^D; Am. v. 26. — If now it is said, that 
 the Lord hath done violence to His tabernacle as 
 to a garden, the tertium comparationis, the point 
 of the comparison, consists in the facility with 
 which the end is accomplished and in the contrast 
 between the proper condition of things and that 
 which the laying waste has produced. As easily 
 as one might root up plants, fell trees and plough 
 the ground, has the Lord overthrown the firm 
 walls of His sanctuary ; and as sad and incom- 
 prehensible as the appearance of a devastated 
 pleasure garden is the spectacle of the sanctuary 
 in ruins. The comparison is the more apt, be- 
 cause the city of God, with her joyous fountains, 
 springing from the dwelling-place of the Most 
 High (Ps. xlvi. 5 ; comp. Ixxxiv. 1-4), could with 
 truth be called niD'^'^J, Jehovah's garden (Is. li. 
 3), napadeiaoc EvTioyiag, a Paradise of glory (Sirach 
 xl. 27). [On the whole, our English Version 
 seems best to express the true sense of this dif- 
 ficult passage, "and He hath violently taken 
 away His tabernacle as if it loere of a garden," 
 i. e., as if it were but such a cottage in the gar- 
 den as vinedressers were accustomed to build till 
 
 the vintage was past. So Calvin. This inter- 
 pretation involves a play on the word '^'Ht, as pro- 
 perly meaning a ^crrc^ew Aowse, and also denoting 
 Gods tabernacle.— W. H. H.]— He hath de- 
 stroyed His places of the assembly. He 
 destroyed His place of assembly (Festort). [So 
 Henderson. Noyes : place of congregation. Blay- 
 ney: His congregation. It is better (see note be- 
 low), to translate, He abolished His appointed ser- 
 vices, or solemnities. — W. II. II.]— The LORD 
 hath caused the solemn feasts and Sab- 
 baths to be forgotten in Ziou. Jehovah ex- 
 terminated l^caused to be forgotfen'\ in Zion festival 
 \_appointed times of Divine service^ and Sabbath. — 
 The result af the destruction of the place for 
 holding festivals is, that the festivals themselves 
 can no longer be celebrated and are forgotten. 
 By Zion, not Mount Zion, but the holy city gene- 
 rally is meant [on the contrary, in the strictest 
 sense the holy places are intended. — W. H. H.]. 
 — And hath despised, in the indignation 
 of His anger, the king and the priest. And 
 rejected [so Fuerst also] in the fury of His wrath 
 King and Priest. Since the festivals are no longer 
 celebrated, those persons who were appointed to 
 officiate in them, are by their omission removed 
 from active service. That the kings belonged to 
 this class of persons is evident, because they 
 were, not only God's representatives to the peo- 
 ple, but also intercessors with God in behalf of 
 the people. "The Israelitish king (especially in 
 the persons of David and Solomon) bore a certain 
 priestly character, in that the king at the head 
 of the people and in their name worshipped God 
 and, on the other hand, brought back to the 
 people the Divine blessing (2 Sam. vi. 17, 18; 1 
 Kings iii. 4; viii. 14, 15, etc.; 55, 56, etc.; 62, 
 63, etc.; ix. 25; 1 Chron. xxix. 10, 11, etc.; 2 
 Chron. i. 6; comp. Ez. xlvi. 1-12)." Oehler in 
 Herz., Real-Enc. VIII., pp. 12, 13. 
 
 "W. That this word stands for "^D is evident, 
 because, 1. W and D frequently are interchanged, 
 especially in the later language (see JO and ^W, 
 2 Sam. i. 22, 0^3 and t^^^^, D3"\ and ^3^, Ges. 
 Thes., p. 931. Ewald, § bQ a). \ We find in Ex. 
 xxxiii. 22 the verbal form ^r\2\i} for ''i^il'D, and in 
 Is. V. 5 r\2Wl^ for DDOO, Mich. vii. 4. 3. Since 
 
 T : T : 
 
 ^DK? and nSltl'P occur only in the places cited, 
 and "^ity is found only here, it would appear that 
 these forms are not so much indications of an in- 
 dependent root ^3ti', as merely different ways of 
 
 writing ^OD. [When Gerlach says that lib 
 never means hiitte, a cot, tent, or tabernacle, he over- 
 looks Ps. Ixxvi. 3, where it undoubtedly de- 
 scribes the holy Temple as God's tabernacle house 
 or dwelling-place. To his argument that T^'JJ 
 would be an unsuitable designation of the Tem- 
 ple, because if it means a house at all, it can or.ly 
 mean such a house as a cot or bower made of 
 
78 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 twisted branches of trees, it may be replied ; 1. 
 the Temple might be so called in allusion to the 
 ancient tabernacle which was temporary and 
 movable ; 2. "^iif may be derived from "^D^if in the 
 generic sense of enclosing, and not in the particu- 
 lar sense of enclosing with a hedge or fence, as 
 "SW to weave. Indeed Gerlacu seems to give 
 np the very point for which he so ably con- 
 tends, that '!]i^ cannot mean a house, when he 
 gives it here the sense of an enclosure (Gehege) 
 and applies it to the whole sacred enclosure, in- 
 cluding of course the Temple. Henderson, also, 
 translates the word His indosure. — W. H. H.] 
 The Sept. translates Koi diETrsTaaev uq a/nve?LOv 
 ro aKijvuiia avrov [He tore up as if it had been a vine 
 His tabernadc'\. It would seem that Job xv. 33 
 was in the mind of the translator, where it is 
 said, 1'1i?3 "jSJ^ Dion^ \_He shall shake off his un- 
 ripe grape as the vine, E. V. Ewald accepts (in 
 his 3d ed.) the Si>pt. translation, and supposes 
 |i3J3, instead of JJ3, to be the true reading. To 
 this Gerlach objects — 1. That DOn cannot mean 
 to tear up, to pull out; 2. The conjecture that 
 |£)J3 may have existed in the t ext is unnecessary, 
 since the Sept. translator may have interpreted 
 n as a vineyard and translated it by d//TrfAof=a 
 vine, as C^S is translated by the Sept. in Lev. 
 XXV. 3, 4.— W. H. H.] The explanation of Pa- 
 REAU, RosENMUELLER and Kalkar, et violenter 
 abripuit sicut sepem horti sepem suam [Notes : He 
 hath violently torn away His hedge, like the hedge of 
 a garden'], according to which |J3 would be taken 
 for I J ^tS'?, is not grammatically allowable, since 
 such an omission of the governing word, after 
 the particle of comparison, could only occur 
 where the context necessarily required the word 
 to be supplied, — as, for example, when it is said. 
 Is. Ixiii. 2, n:3 Ijltp 'inJ3 ["thy garments like 
 the garments of him that treadeth in the wine- 
 vat "], we supply the idea of nJI before ^"|n, be- 
 cause the garments could not be compared to the 
 person of the man treading the wine-press. So 
 Gen. xviii. 11 and other passages which might be 
 adduced here, are to be explained. See my Gr., 
 2 65, 3, note 103, 2. But in our passage there is no 
 necessity for supplying ^tV before |J, because the 
 laying waste of the house can very well be com- 
 pared to devastation of a garden. The explana- 
 tion of Thenius, " He injured that which was, in 
 respect to His house 02'p, standing in an entirely 
 subordinate relation), the garden, by which is 
 meant the Temple courts," is altogether too arti- 
 ficial. If the courts could be called the garden 
 of the Temple, for which, however, Thenius ad- 
 duces no evidence, why did not the Prophet at 
 once call it simply iSti' |J? [Gerlach: "The 
 translation of Thenius, He injured as the garden 
 of Hi"! tabernacle, i. e., that which was the garden 
 with respect to His Tabernacle, speaking analo- 
 gically (whereby the two courts surrounding the 
 Temple-edifice and connected by terraces, would 
 be designated, which might be poetically re- 
 garded as the garden belonging to the Palace of 
 the King of Israel), requires U to be taken in the 
 construct case in spite of the article — an anomaly, 
 
 for the justification of which (see Ewald, §290, 
 d; Gesenius, §108, 2, n) something more is de- 
 manded than the remark, 'UJi' stands in an en- 
 tirely subordinate relation,' for in point of fact 
 it absolutely determines the meaning of JJ,"=M« 
 garden of His tabernacle. — IJ^.ID. This word oc- 
 curs six times in Lam., i. 4, 15 ; ii. 6, bis, 7, 22. 
 Our translators render it in fire different ways, 
 and in this verse, where it occurs twice, in two 
 different senses. In i. 4 ; ii. 6 they call it the 
 solemn feasts; in i. 15, an assembly; in ii. 6, 
 places of the assembly; and the phrase ^j^.''D DV3. 
 they translate in ii. 7, as in the day of a solemn feast, 
 and in ii. 22, as in a solemn day. TUut the word 
 could have such variety of meaning in such close 
 connection is improbable. The word is derived 
 from nj^\ to appoint. It means something fixed, 
 determined upon, appointed. It is used in the sense 
 of a set time, an appointed place, a time or place ap- 
 pointed for meeting together, especially for purposes 
 of religious worship, and hence the regularly ap- 
 pointed and observed ordinances or services of wor- 
 ship. As connected with the assembling of the 
 congregation for worship, it is not unlikely that 
 the word acquired some ambiguity in its use, like 
 our English word church, referring sometimes to 
 time or place of service, sometimes to the people 
 engaged in the service, and sometimes to the ser- 
 vice itself. But we can always trace in the use 
 of the Hebrew word its original signification of 
 a set or appointed time, place or service: and ne- 
 ver, perhaps, has it the simple unqualified mean- 
 ing of an assembly, a congregation, a festive occa- 
 sion. There is no necessity of ascribing to it so 
 many significations in the Lamentations, and two 
 entirely different meanings in two successive 
 lines of this one verse. In i. 15 it may have its 
 primitive meaning of a set time. In ii. 7, 22 the 
 phrase HJ^.ID DV may mean a day a/>/?om<erf,^xe<i 
 upon, predetermined, for any especial occasion. In 
 the other three places, where it occurs, it refers 
 to the services appointed to be celebrated in the 
 Temple. The reference is probably to the daily 
 services of sacrifice, praise and prayer. The 
 cessation of the annual feasts and greater festi- 
 vals, which were of infrequent occurrence, 
 would not be so remarkable as the abrupt and 
 entire cessation of morning and evening prayer 
 which had been observed, without intermission, 
 for nearly five hundred years, or ever since the 
 Temple was first consecrated. — There is, there- 
 fore, no real difference in the use of this word in 
 the Prophecies of Jeremiah and in the Lamenta- 
 tions.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 7. The Lord hath cast oB—The Lord 
 rejected with disdain — His altar. — He hath ab- 
 horred — He abhorred — His sanctuary. The 
 altar and sanctuary are recognized as the central 
 points and chief places of Divine worship. By 
 this it is obvious that IthD'O, sanctuary, here must 
 signify, not in its widest sense the Temple gene- 
 rally, which has been already sufficiently indi- 
 cated by "^iif, tabernacle, and ^4^0, 2:>lace of assem- 
 bly, ver. 6, but in its narrower sense the sanctu- 
 tuary proper, the Temple which contained the 
 Holy place and Holy of Holies. This sense best 
 corresponds with n|3ID [an altar, in the widest 
 
CHAP. II. 8, 9. 
 
 79 
 
 sense, or place where oflFerings are made. — W. 
 H. H.]. foi- not the altar alone, but the holy 
 place aii'l the holy of holies were places of offer- 
 ing (Ex. XXX. 1-lU). — He hath given up — He 
 gave up — into the hand of her enemy the 
 walls of her palaces. The connection requires 
 us to understand by the walls of her palaces the 
 walls of the sanctuary [The altar is treated 
 with contempt, the holy places are defiled, the 
 edifice itself is given into the power of the enemy, 
 and where we once heard the voices of a worship- 
 ping people, is heard now the wild clamor of 
 heathen idolaters. — W. H. H.] — They have 
 made a noise — they shouted, or raided a cry or 
 clamor — in the house of the LORD — in the 
 house of Jehovah — as in the day of a solemn 
 feast [lit., like a day — a time appointed, which 
 can only refer to some regularly appointed festi- 
 val of the church, and is here to be so translated. 
 
 though we might render in conformity with ver. 
 6 and ch. i. 4, 15, a day of appointed religiom 
 services, with reference, however, to the great 
 festivals of the church. — W. H. H.]. A clamor, 
 loud as a festival jubilee, but of a different origin 
 and character, is heard in the temple. It Is a 
 festival for their enemies, not for Israel (i. 15). 
 At this feast Israel is the victim sacrificed. 
 [Wordsworth : " a noise, a cry of jubilee. There 
 is a contrast between the former shout of festal 
 joy of worshippers in the Temple, and the cry 
 of exultation of the Chaldeans, 'Down with it! 
 
 Down with it to the ground !' " Gerlach: "zip 
 
 {cry) is not to be understood, with Pareau and 
 RosENMUELLER, of the war-cry, but of the shouts 
 of joy and triumph on the part of the enemy, as 
 the comparison with the jubilee-festival shows 
 (see Is. XXX. 29)." See crit. note, ver. 6.] 
 
 II. 8, 9. 
 
 8 The Lord hath purposed to destroy the wall of the daughter of Zion ; he hath 
 stretched out a line, he hath not withdrawn his hand from destroying: therefore 
 
 9 he made the rampart and the wall to lament ; they languished together. Her 
 gates are sunk into the ground ; he hath destroyed and broken her bars : her king 
 and her princes are among the Gentiles : the law is no more; her prophets also find 
 no vision from the Lord. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 8. The LORD hath purposed— JeAowaA 
 purposed — to destroy the wall of the daugh- 
 ter of Zion. As has been remarked, we are 
 explicitly informed, Jer. lii. 13, 14; 2 Kings xxv. 
 9, 10, that four weeks after the capture of the 
 city, Nebuchadnezzar had destroyed the Temple, 
 the houses and the city walls. Of the destruc- 
 tion of the walls the passages cited speak with 
 special emphasis (Jer. lii. 14 and 2 Kings xxv. 
 10), "and all the army of the Chaldeans, that 
 were with the captain of the guard, brake down 
 the walls of Jerusalem round about." — He hath 
 stretched out a line — He stretched out the mea- 
 suring-line. The architect employs the measuring 
 line in order to build correctly. Jehovah applies 
 it in order to level the wall to the ground in the 
 most literal manner. This figure substantially 
 occurs in Amos vii. 7-9; the expression first oc- 
 curs in Is. xxxiv. 11 ; 2 Kings xxi. 13 and Job 
 xxxviii. 5 [see Zech. i. 16. Gerlach: "The 
 use of the measuring line denotes that the de- 
 struction of the building will be executed with 
 the same rigorous precision with which an archi- 
 tect carries out his precouceived plan. Michae- 
 Lis' explanation is too artificial; 'aline, as it 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 8.— n^nC'n. often in Jeremiah, ii. 30; iv. 7 ; xxxvi. 29, etc.; in Lam. only here.— ID, Jer. xxxi. 39, K'ri.— Kal of 
 73X in Jer. xii. 11 ; xiv. 2 ; xxiii. 10 ; Hiph. only in Ez.xxxi. 15 and here.— Sn> not in Jer.— SSoX is used in a precisely 
 similar way in Jer. xiv. 2. ' ' 
 
 Ver. 9.— n3X, Piel, in Lam. only here, in Jer. often, xii. 17 ; xv. 7 ; xxiii. 1 ; li. 55.-131^, in Lam. only here and iii. 4, 
 in Jer. xliii. 13, comp. li. 30.— n'13, Jer. xlix. 31 ; li. 30.— jiin, Jer. xiv. 14 ; xxiii. 16. 
 
 were, designated the extent of the destruction, 
 that the devastating punishment might be pro- 
 portionate to the guilt.' " J. A. Alexander: on 
 Is. xxxiv. 11. "The sense of the metaphor may 
 be, either that God has laid this work out for 
 Himself and will perform it (Barnes), or that in 
 destroying He will act with equity and justice 
 (Gill), or that even in destroying He will pro- 
 ceed deliberately and by rule (Knobel), which 
 last sense is well expressed in Rosenmueller's 
 paraphrase, ad mensuram vastabitur, ad regulam 
 depopulabitur," it is laid waste by measure, it is 
 depopulated by rule. While the idea of the tho- 
 roughness and completeness of the work of de- 
 struction, as indicated by Gerlach, suits better 
 here than any of the other explanations suggested 
 above, and is undoubtedly included in the mean- 
 ing of the words, yet the main thought is, that 
 (roc? ^mweZ/" predetermined the extent of the de- 
 struction ; Jehovah purposed it and He stretched out 
 a line to mark its beginning and its end. Human 
 instruments were both incited and restrained by 
 Him, It was a line stretched out, not after, but 
 before the destruction, not to show its extent, 
 but to define its limits, "designed to point out 
 what was to be destroyed" (Owen). — W. H. H.] 
 — ;He hath not v^ithdrawn His hand from 
 destroying (marg., swallowing up). He with' 
 
80 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 drew, or averted not, His hand, see ver. S,from 
 devouring, destroying, swallowing up, see ver. 2. 
 [What He had designed. He executed. He with- 
 drew not His hand till the full measure of de- 
 struction indicated by the line was complete. — 
 W. H. H.]. — Therefore He made — Then made 
 He — the rampart and the wall to lament — 
 rampart and wall mourn. The two words, ram- 
 part and wall, are united as here in Is. xxvi. 1. 
 "Rampart," bn (see 2 Sam. xx. 15; Ob. 20) is 
 the pnmoerium, the circumvallation, or the smaller 
 wall in front of the chief wall. [Fuerst : " The 
 outermost fence of fortifications, the glacis, the 
 (outermost) rampart around the city walls, pomce- 
 rium, TvpoTsixKTjua, ante)niirale." In 2 Sam. xx. 15 
 it is rendered in E. V. by "trench," In Ob. 20, 
 not expressed in E. V., it means, according to 
 FuEHST, a province. — W. H. H.] — They lan- 
 guished together. A prosopopoeia, as in the 
 preceding expression, "He made rampart and 
 wall mourn," and in-i. 4. Conip. vers. 18, 19. 
 
 Ver. 9. [In vers. 1-8 the Lord executing His 
 wrath has been constantly before us. Now the 
 work is done : and in vers. 9, 10, we are atforded 
 a brief glance at the results, after the catastrophe 
 was over. — W. H. H.] Thefirstp:u-t of this verse 
 may be taken as a continuation and conclusion 
 of the foregoing description; or as merely a re- 
 capitulation, by way of transition to what fol- 
 lows. If the latter is correct, then the gates are to 
 be regarded as a part of the walls, and with the 
 walls sunken into the ground. But, since the 
 gates constituted the most important part of the 
 walls, and were in fact the very centres of public 
 life (see their use as Forums, Dent. xxi. 19 ; Ruth 
 iv. 1 ; 2 Sam. xix. 9 ; 1 Kings xxii. 10) and were 
 moreover the keys to the city, we may regard 
 them as representative of the city itself, and so 
 understand the first part of ver. 9, as a compre- 
 hensive conclusion of the preceding description. 
 — Her gates are sunk into the ground. The 
 sense of the verb by itself (^O^ is not to sink 
 down, but to siiik into), as well as the prefix 3, 
 shows that V"^'<3 is not to the earth, but into the 
 
 I VTT 1. J 
 
 earth. The ruined gates sink into the earth, and on 
 account of the accumulation of ruins are buried 
 beneath the level of the ground. [Assem. Annot. 
 "The Jewish Doctors upon the place, out of their 
 Talmudists, tell us strange stories of the gates 
 of Jerusalem sinking down into the ground, that 
 they might not come into the enemies' power, be- 
 cause they were the work of David's hands: and 
 some of ours run as wildly wide another way, 
 expounding it of the Priests and Judges that were 
 wont to sit in the gates, see v. 14. I conceive no 
 more to be meant than that the gates were thrown 
 down to the ground, and lying along there 
 (such of them and such parts of them as had es- 
 caped the fire, i. 4; Neh. i. 3; ii. 3, 13, 17), 
 were bui-ied in the rubbish when the walls were 
 demolished. See Neh. ii. 13, 14; iv. 10." Ger- 
 l.\ch: "This is said of tlie gates because they 
 were so completely destroyed (Pareau, Thenius, 
 buried under rubbiih), that no more trace could be 
 seen of them than if they had sunk into the 
 ground, not because (as Michaelis says) the 
 gates overthrown by the enemy sunk into ditches 
 dug under them."] — He hath destroyed and 
 bioken. — He destroyed and broke in pieces [litei"- 
 
 ally and phonetically shivered, *13K'] — her bars 
 
 [thebarsthai secured the gates, see Ps. cvii. 10. 
 — W. H. H.]. — Her King and her Princes are 
 among the Gentiles, the heathen. From this 
 point the discourse relates to persons instead of 
 things. If the king and princes were already 
 among the heathen, then the transportation into 
 exile had already taken place. — The law is no 
 more — there is no laiv, [Kein Geselz ist mehr vor- 
 handen). min, law, may denote by itself the 
 whole law, a particular part of the law, or the 
 law as a rule of conduct, considered, how- 
 ever, subjectively with respect to the theory, i. e., 
 as the matter of instruction (institutio, doctriiut is 
 in fact the fundamental meaning of the word)^ 
 Add to this that T\'\\r\ TX, ther^ is 7io law, may 
 grammatically refer to the whole preceding sen- 
 tence ("there they cannot practise the law," 
 Luther) [the King and Princes are among the 
 Gentiles, where they cannot observe the law]; or 
 merely to O'lJ^, among the Gentiles ("who have 
 no divine revelation," Kalkar), ["among the 
 Gentiles" who are ''ivithout law,'^ which would 
 be a correct, translation of the Hebrew. Hugh 
 Broughton gives this sense and refers to Rom. 
 ii. 14, "Her King and her Princes are among 
 the heathen that have no law." — W. H. H.] ; or 
 it may be taken as an independent proposition. 
 If we compare such passages as Jer. xviii. 18 
 
 (]ni)n rr^'in n^Xn-xS, "the law shall not perish 
 
 from the priest"), Ez. vii. 26 (tnbo IDXn n^im, 
 " but the law shall perish from the priest "), 
 Mai. ii. 7 {'iT\'D:p ^'^pA''. Hl'mi, "and they should 
 
 seek the law at his mouth "), we would incline to 
 the opinion that mip, law, refers only to instruc- 
 tion out of the law and administration of the law 
 by the priests. But why then are not the priests 
 named? And have not the kings and princes, 
 as judges and guardians of the legal order ( Dent, 
 xvii. 8-20), their share in the administration of 
 law? I believe, therefore, that while T^')^^\ Vi<, 
 there is no law, is to be taken as an independent 
 proposition, it is to be understood in the widest 
 sense, as indicating that there was no longer any 
 sort of administration (whether priestly or king- 
 ly) of the law. [Gerlach adopts the translation 
 Her king and her princes are among the heathen with- 
 out laio, with Luther's explanation, referring 
 the words without law to the whole preceding 
 part of the sentence, " Her king and her princes 
 are among the heathen where they cannot ob- 
 serve the law, or enjoy it." A strong objection 
 to this is that it transfers our thoughts and sym- 
 pathies from the deplorable condition of Jerusa- 
 lem, which is here the subject of description, to 
 the personal condition of her king and princes in 
 a far distant land. Besides, the very structure 
 of the sentence leads us to expect something di- 
 rectly relating to the daughter of Zion. When 
 we are told that her king and her princes are 
 among the heathen, we are prepared to hear of 
 some evil resulting to her from their absence. 
 What that evil result is, we are in fact informed 
 if we understand the Poet to mean, that on ac- 
 count of the absence of "her king and li r 
 
CHAP. II. 8, 9. 
 
 81 
 
 princes," she is deprived of "the law." This 
 agrees substantially with Naegelsbach's inter- 
 pretation, but he has erred in making two wholly 
 independent sentences of what is really only one, 
 though consisting of two poetical parts as the 
 rhythmical structure requires. The correct 
 translation is — Her king and her princes among the 
 heathen — there is no law. This is recommended by 
 the two arguments which Gerlach very forcibly 
 urges in favor of his rendering. 1. It is in ac- 
 cordance with the Hebrew accents, which Nae- 
 GELSBACH entirely ignores and violates, and 
 which connect the words without law, or there is 
 no Zaw with what precedes. 2. " This explana- 
 tion, agreeing with the accents, is further re- 
 commended by the fact that the two last mem- 
 bers of verse 9 describe the fate of those 
 persons, standing to the city in the relation 
 of Helpers and Counsellors or Comforters (her 
 king and her prophets), of whose help and coun- 
 sel, or comfort, the city had been deprived, even 
 as (according to the first member of ver. 9) she 
 had been deprived of the external means of pro- 
 tection. It is the deprivation of all these, for- 
 merly the medium of divine help, that the Poet 
 mourns (see Hos. iii. 4; xiii. 10; Is. iii. 2)," 
 Gf.klach. Another argument for the translation 
 suggested is, that it renders a verb in the first 
 part of the sentence unnecessary, or helps us at 
 least readily to suply it. If we make two wholly 
 independent sentences, as Naegelsbach does, 
 then there is not in the whole book a similar in- 
 stance of the omission of .a verb: and, indeed, it 
 is somewhat conjectural what verb ought to be sup- 
 plied; the simple fact, that the king and princes 
 are among the Gentiles, is not of itself and neces- 
 sarily an evil, we must add to this another idea 
 that they are exiled, or imprisoned, or disgraced, 
 or suffering, or dying among the Gentiles. If, on 
 the other hand, we read the two clauses as in- 
 timately connected and interdependent, as the 
 accents imply, then the proper verb in the first 
 clause, if indeed any verb is necessary, is sug- 
 gested by the last clause, and the construction is 
 not wholly unparalleled in the book. Her king 
 and her princes among the nations — there is no law, 
 plainly means (Because), her king and her princes 
 (are) among the nations — there is (for her) no law. 
 So in i. 2. And her tears on her cheek, there is no 
 comforter to her from all her lovers, means un- 
 doub edly, and her tears (are) on her cheek (be- 
 cause) there is no comforter," etc. In both cases 
 the two clauses are related as cause and effect, 
 and in both the use of the Hebrew TX, which con- 
 tains in itself the verb "to be," prevents what 
 would be the case otherwise and what would be 
 au anomaly in this book, the occurrence of a 
 whole sentence without a single verb expressed. 
 In the other instances in this book, in which our 
 English translators have thought it necessary to 
 supply the verb to be, its omission in the original 
 is highly poetical and very expressive I. 4. 
 "And she is in bitterness," H^-ID XTII, lit. and 
 the — bitterness to her, and i. 20, "for I am in dis- 
 tress," ' 7~^^~^3, lit. for trouble to me, are Hebrew 
 idioms quite synonymous with the old English 
 forms "woe's her," "woe's me!" In i. 22, "for 
 my sighs are many, and my heart is faint," lit. 
 for many my sighs, to my heart sickness, the omis- 
 6 
 
 sion of the verb, while it does not mar the sense, 
 intensifies the expression, when these words are 
 read in their close connection with the preceding 
 prayer. So in our text, the absence of the verb 
 is due to the broken, rapid, vehement style of 
 the poetry of passion ; Her king and her princes 
 among the heathen — there is no law. But if we take 
 the first clause as a complete and separate state- 
 ment of the mere fact that her king and her 
 princes are among heathen, the omission of the 
 verb must be regarded as a blemish and a care- 
 lessness of which the writer of the Lamentations 
 is no where else guilty. — The n ''aning oilaw, ac- 
 cording to this interpretation is obvious. The 
 law of the land, which was thelawof God as espe- 
 cially revealed for the government of the Jewish 
 theocracy, is no longer observed and admin- 
 istered, for its guardians and administrators, the 
 king and the princes are in exile. All "legal 
 observances" were swept away (Henderson). 
 The law, moral, ceremonial and judicial, as re- 
 garded its administration in Juiea, " was no 
 more" (Owen). — -W. H. II.] — Her prophets 
 also find no vision from the LORD. Also her 
 prophets receive no longer vision [revelation from 
 God, divine communication] from Jehovah. These 
 words have been taken as evidence that the Poet, 
 in the whole of the foregoing description, had in 
 mind only the condition of the Israelites remain- 
 ing in the land. But if Jeremiah received an 
 answer to the question which he put to the Lord 
 ten days after he asked it (Jcr. xlii. 4, 7), then 
 it could not be said that the prophets could re- 
 ceive no vision from the Lord. I believe, there- 
 fore, that the Poet here had in mind the great 
 body of the people who had been carried into 
 exile. Those who, with their king, princes and 
 priests, were "among the lieathen," and on that 
 account "without law," were the ones who were 
 also without prophets. [Not the people as such, 
 whether in exile, or remaining in Juilea, but the 
 ideal person of "the daughter of Zion" (see 
 vers. 1, 4, 8, 10) is the subject of this descrip- 
 tion. That her gates were sunken into the ground 
 and her bars broken into pieces, localizes the 
 scene depicted in Jerusalem. It is, further, her 
 king and her princes who are "among the hea- 
 then," 80 that she is left "without law." In 
 strict reference to this mystical personage, repre- 
 senting the genius of the theocratic people mourn- 
 ing amid the ruins of Jerusalem, it is now added 
 " also her prophets find no vision from Jehovah." 
 To suppose the Poet in the first clause of the 
 verse to speak of Jerusalem, and in the two fol- 
 lowing clauses of the people in exile, is to cause 
 au abrupt transition from one subject to another 
 subversive of all unity of construction, and to 
 cover with a cloud of rhetorical confusion, in ad- 
 dition to the cloud of Divine anger, the unique 
 and beautiful conception of the daughter of Zion 
 sitting solitary and forlorn, weeping, helpless 
 and comfortless, amidst the ruins of the theo- 
 cratic city. If, as Naegelsbach argues, it could 
 not be said that the people remaining in the land 
 were without "vision from Jehovah," because 
 Jeremiah received an answer to his question as 
 related in Jer. xlii. 4-7, much less may it be al- 
 firmed that the exiles were without "vision from 
 Jehovah," since at that very time Ezekiel was 
 exercising his prophetical office in Babylonia. 
 
82 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 In point of fact, however, the time of which the 
 Poet speaks is subsequent to the period referred 
 to in Jer. xlii. 4-7: a time, not only succeeding 
 the destruction of the city and the transportation 
 of the mass of the people to Babylonia, but pos- 
 terior to the flight of the fugitives to Egypt, 
 carrying the Prophet with them, as is evident 
 especially from Lam. iv. 17-20; v. 6, 9. At this 
 time, doubtless, Jeremiah himself in Egypt, and 
 Ezekiel and perhaps Daniel in Babylonia, and 
 not improbably other prophets, whose names 
 have not come down to us, were speaking to the 
 people as moved by the Holy Ghost. How then 
 could it be said that the prophets of the daughter 
 of Zioa found no vision from Jehovah, since 
 whatever was spoken by a prophet of God, 
 whether in Jerusalem or at any distance from it, 
 was, according to our theocratic idea, intended 
 for the whole church, however its members 
 might be scattered? The answer is that her 
 prophets found no vision from Jehovah which 
 had for its object her deliverance from her pre- 
 sent sorrows. Her material defences were broken 
 down, her natural guardians and the administra 
 tors of her laws were in captivity, and her pro- 
 phets had no word from the Lord for her relief, 
 
 her help, her comfort. Indeed the words of her 
 prophets at this time, as these very Lamentations 
 show, while not without intimations of a future 
 deliverance, destroyed every vestige of hope of 
 any immediate interposition of God in ht-r behalf. 
 Jeremiah delivered no encouraging prophecies to 
 the Jews after the city was destroyed. There is 
 nothing in Ezekiel of an encouraging character, 
 after this event was fully consummated, if we ex- 
 cept the obscure visions relating to a remote 
 future in the \u.9t chapters of his book. Daniel 
 delivered no prophecy containing any promise of 
 temporal blessing to the Jews, till towards the 
 very close of the captivity. As Scott remarks, 
 " There seems to have been at this period a very 
 peculiar suspension of that information and en- 
 couragement, which the prophets had for many 
 ages been employed to communicate to the peo- 
 ple. Except Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Daniel, no 
 prophet is mentioned from the beginning to the 
 end of the captivity, when Haggai and Zechariah 
 were raised up. This chasm was an evident 
 token of divine displeasure, and must have been 
 a very sensible aggravation of the suffering en- 
 dured by the pious remnant." 
 
 II. 10. 
 
 10 The elders of the daughter of Zion sit upon the ground, and keep silence: they 
 have cast up the dust upon their heads ; they have girded themselves with sack- 
 cloth : the virgins of Jerusalem hang down their heads to the ground. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 10.— V»">X^ Ol^'- See VIxS ^-^-^p, Jer. x.iv. 2 [they lie nuniming on the ground].— The{QTm)0T (ae6 0L8H.,i 143, 
 
 d, 265 c) is not without analogies in Jeremiali, for he says HDlJi '"i- 14; ny01i"1, xiv. 17 [Fuerst makes the word 
 
 Niph., Davidson, Kal.]—"l3y Uoes not occur in Jeremiah fnor any equivalent for it.— W. H. H.].— D'piy Ojn, seeJer. 
 T T I" ~ : It 
 
 iv. 8; vi. 26; xlix.3.— TliPli Jer. xlix. 16; li.40. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 10. To the dignitaries of the Theocracy 
 there belonged two classes, in whose sorrow the 
 grief of the people found its most eloquent expres- 
 sion, — these were the elders and the virgins. See 
 i. 4, 18, 19. [These are now introduced as mourn- 
 ing over the devastated Zion, the absence of the 
 law and of prophetical vision. — \V. H. H.] — The 
 elders of the daughter of Zion sit upon the 
 ground and keep silence [lit. They sit on 
 the (/round, they keep silent, elders of daughter 
 Zion']. The elders, formerly called together 
 to give counsel, now are silent without any 
 counsel to give. [They are speechless, not only 
 
 counselless. They have no words even for sor- 
 row. " Small griefs are eloquent, — great ones 
 dumb" (Clarke). — W. H. H.] — They have 
 cast up dust upon their heads — they sprinkle 
 dust on their head. [Lit., They cast up, or throw 
 up dust upon their head.'] See Josh. vii. 6; Job 
 ii 12; Ez. xxvii. 30. — They have girded 
 themselves -with sackcloth— ^/tcj/ gird on [or 
 put on] sackcloth [or sacks] — The virgins of 
 Jerusalem hang do-wn their heads to the 
 ground — The virgins of Jerusalem sink to the earth 
 their head The virgins also, who were wont to 
 be called officially to act as the mouth-piece 
 of the people, when the feeling of general joy was 
 to be expressed, now are dumb and hang dowa 
 their heads to the ground. 
 
CHAP. II. 11-22. 
 
 PART II. 
 
 II. Vers. 11-22. 
 
 JD Ver. 11. Mine eyes failed with tears, 
 My bowels were troubled, 
 My liver was poured on tlie ground. 
 
 For the ruin of the daughter of my people,^ 
 Because child and suckling fainted away 
 » In the streets of the city ! 
 
 7 Ver. 12. To their mothers they say — 
 
 Where is corn and wine ? — 
 Whilst they fainted as the wounded 
 
 In the streets of the city, — 
 
 Whilst they poured out their soul 
 
 Into their mothers' bosom. 
 
 Vee. 13, What can I testify to thee ? 
 
 What liken to thee, thou daughter of Jerusalem? 
 What compare to thee, 
 
 That I may comfort thee, daughter of Zion ? 
 For great as the sea is thy ruin ! 
 Who can heal thee? 
 J Ver. 14. Thy prophets predicted for thee - 
 
 Falsehood and delusion, 
 And uncovered not thy guilt 
 
 To avert thy captivity. 
 But then they predicted for thee 
 False burdens and expulsions 1 
 
 D Ver. 15. All that passed by the way 
 
 Clapped their hands at thee ; 
 They hissed and wagged their head 
 
 At the daughter of Jerusalem. 
 Is this the city of which they used to say — 
 
 Perfect in beauty, — Joy of the whole earth? 
 Q Ver. 16. All thine enemies 
 
 Gaped at thee with their mouth, 
 They hissed and gnashed the teeth ; 
 
 They said, — We have utterly destroyed— 
 Yea, this is the day we have looked for — 
 
 We have found [it] — we have seen [it] I 
 
 ^ Ver. 17. Jehovah did what He purposed : 
 
 He fulfilled His word 
 That He commanded in the days of old. 
 
 He demolished and pitied not. 
 He made the enemy joyful over thee ; 
 
 He exalted the horn of thine adversaries: 
 ^ Ver, 18. Their heart cried out unto the Lord. 
 
 O wall of the daughter of Zion, 
 Let tears run down like a river 
 
 Day and night. 
 Give thyself no rest, 
 
 Let not the daughter of thine eye cease. 
 
K4 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 p Ver. 19. Arise — cry in the night — 
 ' In the beginning of the night watches ; 
 
 Pour out thy heart like water 
 
 Before the face of Jehovah : 
 Lift up thy hands to Him, for the life of thy young children, 
 That faint for hunger, at the head of every street. 
 
 ■^ Ver. 20. See, Jehovah, and look ! 
 
 To whom hast Thou done this ? 
 Should women eat their fruit — 
 
 Children whom they have nursed ? 
 Should Priest and Prophet 
 
 Be slain in the sanctuary of the Lord ? 
 ^ Ver. 21. The boy and the old man 
 
 Lay on the ground in the streets. 
 My virgins and my young men 
 
 Fell by the sword. 
 Thou hast killed — in the day of Thy wrath — 
 
 Hast slain — hast not pitied ! 
 n Ver. 22. Thou callest together, as on an appointed day of solemnity, 
 
 My terrors from round about. 
 And thp'-e was not, in the day of Jehovah's wrath, 
 
 One Iliac escaped or was exempt. 
 Those I have nursed and brought up — 
 
 My enemy consumed them. 
 
 ANALYSIS. 
 
 \These verses, strictly speaking, constitute the lamentation, for which the preceding description has prepared 
 the way and furnished the theme. — W. H. H.] In ver. 11 the Poet describes his aim suffering, espe- 
 cially as produced by the terrible fate of the starving children and their mothers, ver. 12. In vers. 13, 
 14 the Poet seeks to inform us of the extent, and, at the same time, of the moral cause, of their misfor- 
 tunes. In vers. 15, 16 he describes the malicious rejoicings of their enemies. In ver. 17 he draws at- 
 tention to the fact that the great catastrophe was simply the punishment of disobedience, which God had 
 long determined upon and predicted. Vers. 18, 19 are an exhortation to a prayer of wailing, addressed 
 to the personified ivall of Jerusalem \_Zio7i']. To this exhortation vers. 20-22 are the response. So this 
 chapter closes, like ch. i., with a sort of prayer, which, however, is not a direct prayer, but only up- 
 braids God by asking how He could have permitted such horrible and outrageous crimes ! 
 
 II. 11, 12. 
 
 11 Mine eyes do fail with tears, my bowels are troubled, my liver is poured upon the 
 earth, for the destruction of the daughter of my people ; because the children and 
 
 12 the sucklings swoon in the streets of the city. They say to their mothers, Where 
 is corn and wine ? when they swooned as the wounded in the streets of the city, 
 when their soul was poured out into their mothers' bosom. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 11.— Dri'J'y ^'12, i" Jer. xiv. 6.— The plural ^nJ^D^, only here and Ps. Ixxx. 6. Jer. uses only the Sing., viii. 
 23 ; ix. 17 ; xiii. 17 ; xiv. 17 ; xxxi. 16. — [The Niph. ^31^ J cannot have active sense, which Naegelsbach gives it, nor is this 
 necessary to his interpretation of the passage.— W. H. il.]— 133, the liver (never in Jer.), see Ex. xxix. 13, 22; Lev. iii. 4, 
 etc., 80 called because minium, viscerum et gravissimum et densissimum est (Galen, de usupartium, 6, 7, in Ges. Thes.. p. 656X 
 [Sept. translates it r/ Sofa /uoO, my glory. But the undoubted use of the word as meaning the liver, and its conmition here 
 with «i^es and ioioeZs, arc conclusive.— W. H. H.J— ''I3_i;-r\3 "UB?, is entirely Jeremiac, vi. 14 ; viii. 11, 21. Again in Lam 
 iii. 48 ; iv. 10.— Verb ntOJ^, tbree times in this chap , vers. 11, 12, 19; never in Jer.- pjri SVl^. Comp. Jer. xliv. 7.^ 
 ^n". and iT'^p, not unusual in .Ter., v. 1; ix. 20; xlix. 25. 
 
 Ver. 12.— The Hithp. "nDnE/n, besides here, only in iv. 1 and Job xsx. 16.— p'H, Jer. xxxii. 18. 
 
 •with tears — mine eyes have become dim in conse- 
 quence of tears \jnine eyes failed with tears ; Old 
 English, were spent, Broughton. The ej'es are 
 represented as exhausted, worn out, by weeping. 
 
 EXEGETICAL and CRITICAL,. 
 
 In vers. 11, 12 the Poet proceeds to describe 
 
 his own grief. Ver. 11. Mine eyes do fail 1 — W. H. H.]. See Jer. xiv. 6; Lam. iv. 17 ; Ps. 
 
CHAP. II. 11, 12. 
 
 85 
 
 ixix. 4; cxix. 82, 123. — My bowels are trou- 
 bled — my bowels are tumultuously moved. See i. 
 20. He depicts his sorrowful emotions by show- 
 ing how his eyes and bowels have become affected 
 by them. [Bowels, here as elsewhere, are used 
 in a sense entirely figurative. His eyes, literally, 
 wept. But the poet never intended to indicate 
 the literal movement of his bowels as an evidence 
 of his grief. The bowels, according to Hebrew 
 habits of thought and expression, were the seat 
 of mental emotions, especially of a painful na- 
 ture. His tears kept pace with his agony of 
 mind. A correct translation would be, my soul 
 was greatly moved. See notes on i. 20. The 
 verbs in this verse are preterites, and ought to 
 be so rendered. — W. H. H.] — My liver is 
 poured out upon the earth — ?7iy liver has 
 fallen out to the earth [lit., tvas poured out on the 
 ffround']. The pouring out of the liver caunot be 
 unde.'Stood as if it were emptied of its fluid con- 
 tents, for it has no such contents. Nor can we 
 say that, properly speaking, the flowing out of 
 the bile, caused by compression of the liver, is 
 intended. So Fuerst, who explains this text by 
 Job xvi. 13. For in that case, the bile should 
 be designated as being poured out. Rather, the 
 Poet would say, that the liver itself falls out 
 from him, as it were ; as we say that a man's 
 heart falls out from him [that he loses heart?]. 
 The liver is thus evidently regarded as the seat 
 of emotions, the reverse of those which at that 
 time controlled the Poet. The liver is described 
 as the seat of pleasure and courage (see De- 
 LiTZscH, Psychologie, IV., 1 13, p. 228, 1st ed.; 
 p. 268, 2ded.). The falling out of the liver, 
 then, denotes the loss of all joyousness and cou- 
 rage; and is conceived of, it would seem, as the 
 consequence and climax of the fermentation of 
 the viscera in general, described in what pre- 
 cedes. The whole phrase is peculiar to this pas- 
 sage. [The physiological explanations of many 
 commentators (see Blaynet, Henderson) require 
 us to regard the Poet as sutFering from bilious 
 diarrhoea. The Hebrews (probably not so well 
 versed in physiology as the commentators ima- 
 gine) identified ihQ physical life with the substance 
 of the soul, and associated mental activity with the 
 organs and functions of physical vitality, locating 
 intellectual action in the head and heart, and 
 purely emotional in the heart and lower viscera, 
 as the liver and the boivels. Remembering this, 
 we may dismiss the unpleasant suggestions of 
 the movement of the bowels and ejection of bile 
 from the liver, in the literal sense, and, escaping 
 the painful presumptions of colic and jaundice, 
 allow our Poet to express the anguish of his soul 
 in the metaphorical language of his race. The 
 liver is here regarded, says Notes, as the seat of 
 feeling, and its being poured out on the ground, 
 remarks Gerlach, is explained by such analo- 
 gous expressions as Ps. xlii. 5, 1 pour out my soul ; 
 Job XXX. 16, My soul is poured out. "Here, as 
 with regard to many other of the bodily organs 
 as mentioned in Scripture, there is not only a li- 
 teral sense capable of universal interpretation, 
 but a metaphorical import that cannot be com- 
 municated by any literal version, unless when 
 the same metaphorical signification happens to 
 exist also in the language into which the trans- 
 lation is made. Dr. J. M. Good touches on this 
 
 subject in the Preface to his Translation of the 
 Song of Songs, and is disposed to contend that 
 such allusions, in order to convey their real sig- 
 nification, should be rendered, not literally, but 
 equivalently ; and we so far agree with him as 
 to think that the force and delicacy of many pas- 
 sages must be necessarily impaired and their true 
 meaning lost, when the name merely is given, in 
 a language where that name does not involve the 
 same metaphorical idea. * * * Among our- 
 selves the spleen is supposed to be the region of 
 disappointment and melancholy. But were a 
 Jew to be told, in his own tongue, that the ini- 
 mitable CowPER had long labored under the 
 spleen, he would be ignorant of the meaning of 
 his interpreter; and, when at last informed of it, 
 might justly tell him that, although he had lite- 
 rally rendered the words, he had by no means 
 conveyed the idea" (The Pictorial Bible). — VV. H. 
 H.] — For the destruction — on account of the 
 ruin — of the daughter of my people, be- 
 cause the children and the sucklings 
 swoon (marg., faint) in the streets of the 
 city. [Lit., in the languishing ov f aiming of child 
 a7id sucking- babe in the streets of the city.'\ The 
 Poet's grief was caused by the ruin of his people 
 in general, but especially by the frightful suffer- 
 ings of the poor children, which he represents as 
 the very acme of the calamity. 
 
 Ver. 12. The Poet describes, in a manner gra- 
 phic and true to nature, what he had said in a 
 general way (ver. 11) of the wasting away of the 
 children. The strokes of his pencil are few in 
 number, but suffice to place before our eyes an 
 exact picture of those heart-rending scenes. — 
 — They say to their mothers — To their mo- 
 thers they said. The imperfect (•TIOK'') is used to 
 indicate an act in the past often repeated. Comp. 
 my Gr., ^ 87,/. For it is evident the Poet de- 
 scribes a past condition of things, namely, that 
 ensuing on the capture of the city. At that time, 
 when neither the famished city (see Jer. Hi. 6), 
 nor the conqueror, who had no time then to think 
 of it, furnished the means of subsistence, the fa- 
 mine must have been at its highest stage. [The 
 word, which is future in form, should undoubt- 
 edly be translated by our present. So E. V., 
 Calvin, Brocghton, Bi,ayney. Henderson, 
 Gerlach. It is an instance of the future used, 
 as our present is, in graphic descriptions. See 
 ver. ], ^''i^'', covers. To their mothers they say. 
 — W. H. H.]— "Where is corn and wine? 
 Corn (pi) wiiich usually occurs in connection 
 with grapes (K/H'P, see Jer. xxxi. 12), here de- 
 notes, neither baked bread alone, as most com- 
 mentators think, nor only roasted corn, parched 
 corn, as Thenius would have it. For the hun- 
 gry children longed only for food in general 
 [not for a particular kind of food]. Corn, 
 here, is to be taken, therefore, in the gene- 
 ral sense, which DP)/, bread, formerly had, a 
 meaning which the word seems to have in 
 Ps. Ixxviii. 24 also, where the manna is called 
 corn of heaven, D^P^'UI- The Poet does not 
 say, but every one feels, how this question, 
 which they could not answer, must have cut 
 into the hearts of those mothers. — When they 
 swooned — whilst they fainted [lit., in fainting] 
 
86 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEllEMIAH. 
 
 The prefix 3, in, here has a temporal sense: they 
 said so whilst they were wasting away. [So in 
 the last clause. In breathing out their soul, i. e., 
 they said so, whilst they were dying. Cran- 
 mer's Bible gives a free translation, but admira- 
 bly expresses the sense of the whole verse. 
 "Even when they spake to their mothers: where 
 is meat and drink? For while they so said, they 
 fell down in the streets of the city, like as they 
 had been wounded and some died in their mothers' 
 bosom.'— W. H. H.].— As the wounded in 
 the streets of the city. Although not wounded, 
 yet they died a painful death as the wounded do. 
 [The idea rather is, not necessarily that they 
 died, all of them at least; but, overcome with 
 weakness and suffering, many of them fell sud- 
 denly in the streets as if wounded, whilst others 
 died in their mothers' bosom. — W. H. H.] — 
 "When their soul was poured out — whilst 
 breathing out their soul — [lit. in breathing out']. 
 
 The soul pours itself forth, whilst the breath 
 streams out. It is also the same as expirare, — • 
 into their mothers' bosom — in the lap of their 
 mothers. Thenius would understand the bosom. 
 But the mothers are regarded as sitting on the 
 ground, and the children lying in their laps. 
 [^Bosom is better. There were children of all ages 
 among those alluded to. Some old enough to seek 
 for food themselves and fall down in the streets 
 of the city. Some able to ask in words for food 
 and drink. Others suc/clitigs, ver. 11, and tliese 
 doubtless are especially meant as breathing out 
 their soul in their mothers' bosom while vainly 
 seeking nourishment at the breast. — W. H. H.] 
 Thenius rightly draws attention to the Hithpael 
 forms of the verbs in rhe second and third clauses 
 (DDtpirnn and ^iJ'Z't^n). These indicate how the 
 children struggled, and how intense the condi- 
 tions of their wasting away and expiring were. 
 
 II. 13-14. 
 
 13 What thing shall I take to witness for thee? What thing shall I liken to thee, 
 O daughter of Jerusalem ? What shall I equal to thee, that I may comfort thee, 
 O virgin daughter of Zion ? for thy breach is great like the sea ; who can heal thee ? 
 
 14 Thy prophets have seen vain and foolish things for thee ; and they have not dis- 
 covered thine iniquity, to turn away thy captivity ; but have seen for thee false 
 burdens, and causes of banishment. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 ■Ver. 13. — The K'tib ^IIJ^K is certaiuly wrong, since "^H^ is never used in Kal. We must read, therefore, according to 
 
 the K'ri 'HT'J.'X- The meaning of T'J^n is to give testimony, bear witness. The person wliom the testimony concerns is 
 
 usually indicated by 3. Yet there are three places where the accusative in the form of a suffix .stands in the place of 3. Of 
 
 the witnesses who were brought forward against Naboth, it is said, 1 Kings xxi. 10, ^ni>'"1> and in ver. 13, ^ri^J/''^- ^° 
 
 Job xxix. 11 it is said, and here in a good sense {hotiam partem) ''JT'^ym Hj^X"^ T^'I. According to these aud other 
 
 analogies, which are placed together in my Gr., J 78, we may take tlie suffix here as denoting the remoter object in the 
 dative case. [So Sept. : Tt /u.apTupi)o-<o crot. Calvin: Quid cnnUstabor tihi. Hoothroyd: WIuU shall 1 testify in IheeJ The 
 words have been variously rendered. Cka.nmer's Bible : Wlmtsliall I sayoftheef Bisii. Bible. : "What shall I siiy unto thee?" 
 Brouoiiton: What testimony shall I brimi for thee t Blaynky : What shall! urge to thee? Henderson: What shall I take 
 to witness * carelessly overlooking the suffix. Notes : How shall 1 address t/iec /J— The Piel n31 is comparare, conferre, to 
 
 compare one thing with another. See Is. xlvi. 5 ; xl. 18. 25 ; Song Sol. i. 9. Only the Kal occurs in Jer. vi. -2.— The Hiphil 
 mU^n, which occurs only here and Is. xlvi. 5, has the same signification, no form of the verb niiy is found in Jeremiah. — 
 
 D'bo'-IT' nSri- In tl^e Lamentations only here and v. 15, never in Jeremiah. [The definite article here is emphatic, aud 
 
 is well rendered by Naeoelsbach, " tlwu daughter of Jerusalem."— W. U. H.]— IjOH JXV The Piel DH J in Jer. xvi. 7 ; xxxi. 
 
 13. [The force of 1 here is to express the end or design, that 1 might comfort titee. CiLVlN].— *-^-r\3 rt7in3, see i. 15.— 
 
 □13 '7nj-'3. The expression is found only here : yet comp. Jer. vi. 23 ; 1. 42.— T^iy. Very frequent in Jeremiah, see ver. 
 
 ll.—^tj-^j Jeremiah uses frequently, iii. 22 ; viii. 22 ; xvii. 14, e<c., but never in construction with 7.— [The future form of 
 
 the verlis, which Naeoelsbach renders as simple presents, express an optative sense, what may, can or shall I testify, etc.— 
 W.H. II.] , 
 
 Ver. 14. — Verb Hin Jeremiah never uses. — Tvll, which Jeremiah uses not infrequently, xi. 20; xsxiii. 6; xlix. 10, is 
 
 I T T T ' 
 
 construed with 7 W only here and iv. 22. The significance of this construction is, the disclosing of a matter before con- 
 cealed. [The phrase is elliptical ; they had not removed that which covered their iniquity as a veil (Calvin, Gerlach, Rosen- 
 MUELLF.R, etc.). Blatnet : " For Sy the Syr., seems to have preserved the true reading 7] 7-" Besides the lack of authority 
 for this emendation of the text, the recurrence of this verb with ^_J> in iv. 22, seems conclusive.— W. H. H.]—|'|J?^ Jeremiah 
 often uses ii. 22; iii. 13 ; xiii. 22, etc.— TUn singular Xt^O, in sense of effatum, is found in Jeremiah only in the familiar pas- 
 
 T ~ 
 
 sage xxiii. 33-40, where he forbids the use of this expression. The plural occurs only here.— XltV in Jeremiah only in the 
 adverbial expression Xltl'S. ii. 30; iv. :'.0; vi. 23; xviii. 15; xlvi. 11; whilst in Ezokiel we find X1C jUH. xii. 24; iliriO 
 tiW, xiii. 17 ; XIC'-DD ?• ^^'- -8 — D'H-llO is an-. \ey. ; ri'lH means dctrusit. Ps. v. 11, expulit, Jeremiah 7iii. 3 ; xxiii. 
 3, 8 : xxix. 14, 18, «te., disjiuiit, disjecil, Jer. xxiii. 2 ; 1. 17, but also ahduxit, Deut. xiii. 6, 11, seduxil, Deut. xiii. 14 ; 2 Chron. 
 
CHAP. 11. 13, 14. 
 
 87 
 
 xxi. 11 ; Prov. vii. 21. [Owen : " There seems to be a mistake in this word of a T for a 1, two letters very similar ; for the 
 Targ. the fiyr. and the Arab., must have bo read the word, as they render it in the sense of what is deceptive, fallacious, or 
 imaginary. It is in the last rendered jihantasms. The word occurs in .ler. xxii. 14, and is ajipliiid to chambers through which 
 air or wind passed freely. It may be rendered here winds or airy things. Such was the character of their prophecies. 
 This is far more suitable to the passage than expulsions or rejections, as given by the Sept. and Vulff." As the verb HIJ 
 
 Bometimes, though rarely, has the sense of misleading, seducing, may not the idea of fallacious have been derived from 
 CnnO ? There is no necessity, however, for imposing such a meaning upon it here.— W. II. II.] 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 In these two closely connected verses, the Poet 
 expresses tue thought that the true prophets can- 
 not repair the injury the bad prophets have 
 caused. He greatly desires to comfort Zion, by 
 way of prophetical testimony in her behalf, and 
 by way of comparison to her advantage with 
 other sufferers. But it is impossible: for im- 
 measurable and irretrievable injury has been 
 done by the false testimony of her prophets. 
 
 Ver. 13 "What thing shall I take to wit- 
 ness for thee ? What testifij I to thee ? [ What 
 can I testify to thee? — W. H. H.] The Poet means 
 prophetical testimony (see TH^^T^, testimony, la. 
 viii. 16), and that in the sense of instruction, 
 warning, correction, (see Jer. vi. 10), not in the 
 sense of comforting by promises. See below, 
 next clause of this verse, on the words that I may 
 comfort thee. [While the word signifies propheti- 
 cal testimony, to bear witness in behalf of God, 
 it may signify divine testimony either for or 
 against a person, and here the former is intimated 
 both by the construction (see critical note below), 
 and by the following words that I may comfort 
 thee. Besides the Prophet was actually testifying 
 against the people in the name and by the Spirit 
 of God. But He received no favorable message 
 in their behalf. There is an allusion to ver. 9, 
 " her prophets also find no vision from Jehovah." 
 — W. H. H.] What thing shall I liken to 
 thee — What liken to thee, — O thou daughter 
 of Jerusalem? What shall I equal to 
 thee — what compare to thee, — that I may com- 
 fort thee, O virgin daughter of Zion? It 
 is a comfort for the unfortunate to know that 
 others have endured equal suffering. This com- 
 fort cannot be given to Zion. The idea of com- 
 forting can be referred to all three of the pre- 
 ceding verbs, although to testify T^H, never 
 means prophesying in order to comfort and make 
 happy, but has always the sense of warning, cor- 
 rection: yet even warning, correction and in- 
 struction may be a comfort. [Where this 
 Hebrew verb occurs in the sense of waining or 
 protest it is always connected with its object by the 
 
 significant preposition 3 or 1^. Here the word 
 may be taken simply in the sense of bearing wit- 
 ness, in which sense it is favorably used (even in 
 Hiphil) iu Job xxix. 11, see also Mai. ii. 14. The 
 meaning is, What can I, as a prophet of God ami 
 in the name of God, testify for God in thy behalf, 
 in order to comfort thee? Wouusworth: "Wiiat 
 prophetic testimony shall I utter in God's name, 
 in order to console tbee ? 1 liave no message of 
 comfort for thee; and thy misery is so great, that 
 I can find no likeness or parallel to it, wherewith 
 to assuage thy sorrow." — W. H. H.] — For thy 
 breach is great like the aeB.—for great as the 
 tea is thy rum, or injury ; who can heal thee 't 
 
 That is to say, Zion's hurt is immeasurable, 
 and incurable. [Blayney: "The breach ot 
 wound, which Jerusalem had received, is by an 
 hyperbole said to be great, deep or wide, like the 
 sea, which is, as it were, a breach made in the 
 earth." Hknuerson: "He cannot find any ob- 
 ject to put iu parallel with the lamentable con- 
 dition of Jerusalem. The only exception is the 
 sea, which, on account of its vast dimensions, 
 alone furnished a fit emblem of the magnitude of 
 the devastation effected by the Chaldeans." 
 AssEM. Ann. ; " Such a breach, as not some small 
 river, but the sea is wont to make, when it hath 
 rent asunder and got thorow the sea-walls, that 
 before kept it out; such as cannot be made up 
 again. See Jer. li. 42; Ez. xxvi. 3; Job xxx. 
 14." Calmet: Un ocean de maux, un deluge dt 
 douleurs, une mer d' affliction, A sea of miseries, a 
 flood of troubles, an ocean of sorrow.] 
 
 Ver. 14. Thy prophets have seen vain 
 and foolish things for thee. Thy prophets 
 foretold to thee deceit and white-wash. [Thy pro- 
 phets prophesied to thee falsehood and delusion. The 
 
 last word (73^) has been variously translated, 
 though Naegelsbach alone can claim the unique 
 and parabolical idea expressed by white-wash. 
 This meaning is suggested by the use of the word 
 in £z. xiii. 10-15; xxii. 28, rendered in our ver- 
 sion untempered mortar. Whether Ezekiel meant 
 white-wash, or not, which is doubtful, the word 
 can have no such meaning here. To daub a wall 
 with white-wash is feasible. To prophesy white- 
 wash is impossible. The Hebrew word (/SO) 
 seems to have suggested the idea of something 
 viscous, sticky, slimy; hence applied to lime, mor- 
 tar, as by Ezekiel; or to the white of an egg 
 (Job vi. 6), from which comes the idea of insipi- 
 dity, want of savor, which is the sense adopted in 
 our text by Broughton: The prophets have looked 
 out for thee things vain and which have lost the salt- 
 ness, and by Calvin, insulsitatum, vel insipidum, 
 tastelessness or insipidity; this sense easily sug- 
 gests (he idea of folly, in which sense the word 
 in our text is rendered by most of the versions; 
 Sept.: a(ppoavvT/v ;Yvlq.: stulta; LvTHER-.thorieh- 
 te Gesichte; E. V.: foolish things. The word as 
 thus used would implj' tnore than mere absurdity, 
 which is the sense lii.AYNEYand Boothroyd give 
 it. It means a folly that is chargeable with yuilt, 
 in which sense the cognate word n^3n is used in 
 Job i. 22 (see Barnes' Notes), xxiv. 12: a folly 
 especially that is deceptive, that does not fulfil 
 the expectations it excites, in which sense the 
 
 same word H/Sfl is applied to false prophets in 
 Jer. xxiii. 13. — We have not in English a word 
 that will express both these ideas, — delusive 
 folly or foolish delusions. Gerlach uses the 
 word Blend-werk, false-show, delusion, but ac- 
 knowledges that it expresses only the effect, and 
 not the contemptible character of what the pro- 
 
88 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 pliets did. The word stuf, adopted by Hender- 
 son, "thy prophets see for thee vanity and stuff," 
 is hardly equivalent to the Hebrew word. He 
 borrowed it from Gataker, who says, "They 
 look upon them to be seers, but saw not what 
 they should see, and told what they saw not, 
 nothing but vain and frivolous stuff, the froth of 
 their own fancies, Jer. xxiii. 16. '26; xxvii. 14, 
 15." — w. H. H.j The expression NV^ DTn \_mw 
 vain thiriffs ; E. V., prophesied falsehood'], is found 
 five times in Ezpkiel and only in Ezekiel, xiii. 6, 
 7, liS; xxi. 3-4 [E. V. 29], xxii. 28. The expres- 
 sion Ssn [E. v., here, foolish things, in Ezek., 
 uiilempered mortar], is also Ezekiel's, for it is used 
 by him emphatically four times, in the same 
 chapter that contains the phrase (Nlt^ TiVn) just 
 referred to, xiii. 10, 11, 14, 15; and it is used 
 ao-ain by him, and that, too, in immediate con- 
 nection with the same phrase (Xli;/ <^^^) in xxii. 
 28. The thirteenth chapter of Ezokielis directed 
 against the false prophets. Ezekiel in that de- 
 nunciatory discourse has before his eyes what 
 Jeremiah had said relative to the same subjoct 
 (^^chap. xxiii.). Now in Jer. xxiii. 13 occurs the 
 
 expression H/Sn, in the prophets of Samaria I saw 
 riSan TE. v., folli/, marg., an unsavory, or an 
 absurd thing']. 73^ [the word in our text] never 
 occurs in Jeremiah. Besides here, it occurs only 
 in Ezekiel at the places above cited, and in Job 
 vi. 6. For its meaning see the thorough discus- 
 sion of Haevernxck in his Comm. on Ezekiel. 
 The whole passage in which Ezekiel uses the ex- 
 pression Ssn in the sense of white-wash, and to 
 which xxii. 28 afterwards refers, bears through- 
 out the peculiar characteristics of Ezekiel's 
 metaphorical style. We cannot, therefore, doubt 
 that Ez. xiii. was written earlier than our chap- 
 ter: and also that the words from '^'Sl'^J to ipr\ 
 originated from the above cited places of Ezekiel. 
 See the Introduction, I 3. [The inference con- 
 tained in the Introduction and implied here, that 
 if this is a quotation from Ezekiel, Jeremiah 
 could not be the author of the Lamentations, is en- 
 tirely gratuitous. The thirteeulh chapter of 
 Ezekiel must have been written before the final 
 destruction of Jerusalem; "about five years'' 
 before "Jerusalem was taken and destroyed," 
 according to Wordsworth. Even if the prophecy 
 of Ezekiel had been nearly or quite contempora- 
 neous with the destruction of Jerusalem, it is a 
 mere assumption, incapable of proof, that Jere- 
 miah could not have possessed a copy of that 
 prophecy, even if we are obliged to believe that 
 he wrote these lamentations immediately after 
 the destruction of the city. With the close inter- 
 course that must have subsisted at the time be- 
 tween Babylonia and Palestine, with an invading 
 army constantly flowing in and meeting detach- 
 ments guarding captives and si)oil.s going out, and 
 with the lively sympathy tiuit niu.-st have existed 
 between Ezekiel and Jeremiah, and between the 
 pious Jews in exile and the pious Jews in Judea, 
 it would be neither impossible nor unlikely that 
 the utterances of those prophets should be inter- 
 changed as rapidly as they were committed to 
 
 writing. — In point of fact, however, it is by no 
 means clear that this passage is a quotation from 
 Ezekiel. As to the first expression, it is com- 
 posed of two words only, both in frequent use in 
 the earlier Scriptures and in the prophets who 
 preceded Jeremiah. And as to the second, it is 
 useil in a connection entirely dift'erent from that 
 in which it occurs in Ezekiel, and very obviously 
 
 in a different sense. How prophesying /DH 
 could be suggested by daubing a wall with /3ri. 
 it is difficult to see. How the word can mean the 
 same tiling in both places, is also beyond the 
 power of ordinary perception. There would be 
 as much propriety in giving the word the mean- 
 ing of white-wash or mortar in Job vi. 6 as here. 
 This is no more a quotation from Ezekiel, than 
 Ezekiel's use of the word is a quotation fioiii Job. 
 — W. H. H.] — And they have not discovered 
 thine iniquity, to turn aw^ay thy captivity 
 — And uncovered not thg guilt, to turn ihg captivity 
 [i. e., to prevent it, or avert it. tio the Syr. 
 translates it.] The expression, turn thy captivity, 
 founded on Deut. xxx. 3. is frequent in .Jeremiah 
 (see xxxii. 44; xxxiii. 7, etc.), and with Ezekiel 
 (xvi. 53; xxix. 14, etc.). But in the connection 
 in which it here occurs, it does not mean, as it 
 does in the places referred to, vertere cnptivita- 
 tein, i. e., reducere captivos [turn the captivity, i. e., 
 bring back the captives], but can only mean 
 arerlere capli"itate7n [avert, or prevent the capti- 
 vity]. By open exhortations to repentance, the 
 prophets would have averted the captivity (see 
 Ez. xxii. 30, 31). The words arc connected with 
 what precedes. [Assem. Ann.: "They laid not 
 thy sins before thee, to bring thee to repentance, 
 whereby thy present miseries might have been 
 prevented, Jer. vi. 13, 14; viii. 11 ; xxiii. 17, 22." 
 Gi:klach and others understand this to mean 
 that, after the captivity was a fact, the prophets 
 had not led the people to a repentance that would 
 have delivered them from it, see Ps. xiv. 7 ; Job 
 xiii. 10 ; Jer. xxx. 18. But this sense would not 
 be pertinent here. Our text looks back to one 
 of the origiiialcausesof the present misery. What 
 her prophets might have done to prevent it, they 
 cannot now do, even if by doing it they could 
 terminate that misery ; for now her prophets can 
 fnd no vision from Jehovah, ver. 9. If they had 
 exercised their power aright when they possessed 
 it, the captivity would have been averted. This 
 is the idea now in the Poet's mind. — AV. 11. II.] — 
 But have seen for thee false burdens and 
 causes of banishment — And they foretold to 
 thee sayings of deceit and of seduction. ^But then 
 they saw for thee burdens of falsehood and expulsions. 
 — W. II. H.] The connecting thought is. And so 
 prophesied they, etc. — False burdens — oracles of 
 deceit, Kit!/ ntX^D, are declarations of delusory 
 purport, which result not felicitously, but ruin- 
 ously. — Causes of banishment, seductions, 
 D'n-np, can signify, ambiguously indeed, either 
 seductions or banishments. Both predicates may 
 refer to the discourses of the false prophets. Lu- 
 ther makes the last feature only conspicuous. 
 "But they have preached to thee wantonly, in 
 that they have preached thee out of the land." 
 TiiENnis rightly draws attention to the fact that 
 Jeremiah, xxvii. 10, 15, in a passage where he 
 
CHAP. II. 13, 14. 
 
 8<> 
 
 warns of the false prophets, expresses emphati- 
 cally and exactly the same thought which is con- 
 tained in our verse, "Hearken not ye to your 
 prophets * * * for they prophesy a lie unto you, 
 to remove you far from your land; and that I 
 should drive you out (D3nX "'^'^HIT'l. comp. ver. 
 15, DDnX ""nnn J^oS), andyeshouldperish." It 
 is therefore very possible that the Poet, by the 
 choice of this word, seemingly invented ad hoc for 
 his present purpose, would give us to understand 
 that he had in view not only the declarations of 
 Ezekiel, but also those of Jeremiah pertaining to 
 this matter. Thus the verb niJ [from which the 
 Hebrew noun is derived] is, as seen from the ex- 
 amples adduced, especially current with Jere- 
 miah. It is found in this prophet nineteen times, 
 elsewhere in the old Testament thirty-four times, 
 ten of which are in Deuteronomy. But that it 
 may be used here ambiguously, its connection 
 with )f.yd indicates. [There are three objections 
 to the translation of Naegelsbach. 1. It makes 
 the last clause of the verse a mere repetition of 
 the first clause. 2. It is very doubtful if the last 
 word, rendered seduction (Notes, seductions), can 
 have that meaning. Wordsworth gives its lite- 
 ral meaning as drivings away, and explains it 
 consistently with the general idea adopted by our 
 author, "the prophecies of thy false prophets, to 
 which thou didst hearken, instead of listening to 
 God, have banished thee, and driven thee away 
 from thy home." 3. The word rendered by Nae- 
 gelsbach, Wordsworth, Notes and others, pro- 
 phecies, and in E. V. burdens, cannot mean any 
 prophecy, without reference to its subject or 
 character, but designates a prophecy of a threat- 
 ening or minatory nature. The correct transla- 
 tion then is. But they saw for thee burdens of va- 
 nity and expulsions or banishments. But how could 
 this be true of the false prophets ? Hengsten- 
 BERG (on Zech. i. 9) understands the vain burdens 
 and exiles or dispersions, which the false prophets 
 predicted as referring to the enemy. " The false 
 prophets endeavor to make themselves beloved 
 by the people, by predicting a great calamity, 
 which should come upon their powerful oppres- 
 sors." (Soalso DiODATi.) The objection to this 
 is that it does not naturally follow the second 
 clause of the verse, and is, after all, only a repe- 
 tition of the first clause. Henderson takes the 
 word burdens as meaning the causes of punishments, 
 as our version has rendered the last word causes 
 of banishment. "The false prophets, in their at- 
 tempts to account for the captivity, invented any 
 one but the true one, — the apostacy of the Jews." 
 This preserves the logical connection between 
 the three clauses of the verse, but is philologi- 
 eally untenable, for the idea of causes of punish- 
 ment is not suggested by the words used. The 
 probable explanation is suggested by the use of 
 the future with ) conversive, which, while it 
 makes the verb a preterite, suggests a time pos- 
 terior to that to which the preceding preterites 
 referred. Her prophets having predicted vain 
 and foolish things, and failed to bring the people 
 to repentance, and so save them from captivity, 
 then at last, after the captivity occurred, them- 
 selves predicted for her burdens of misfortune 
 and of banishments. Those very prophets who 
 
 once prophesied so many things full of flattery, 
 overwhelmed and panic-stricken in the hour of 
 calamity, see nothing but evil for the daughter 
 of Zion, and were loudest in their predictions of 
 punishments and misfortunes. This would agree 
 with the interpretation already given to the 
 words in ver. 9. Her prophets also find no vision 
 from Jehovah, i. e., no vision of good, of blessing, 
 they have only visions of evils, prophetical bur- 
 dens full of apprehensions and fears. Another 
 explanation suggests itself from the double mean- 
 ing of the verb to see, nin, which may mean 
 merely to see, or to see by prophetical inspiration. 
 It may be taken in the former sense, with a sa- 
 tirical purpose. These prophets did see propheti- 
 cally, or pretended to do so, visions from God 
 that were vain and delusory, but they afterwards 
 actually saw in course of fulfilment the burdens 
 of misfortune and banishment pronounced by Jere- 
 miah and formerly derided by them. The use of 
 the word t^lt^, if it necessarily means false 
 (though it may possibly mean simply misfortune, 
 see Job vii. 3; Is. xxx. 28; Hos. xii. 12), would 
 be a valid objection to the last interpretation, but 
 not to the other, for in that case the burdens were 
 false burdens, suggested by their own excited and 
 terrified imaginations. The force of the future 
 with 1 conversive, following verbs in the prete- 
 rite, may be expressed here thus, but then, i. «., 
 after the captivity, they saw false burdens and ex- 
 pulsions. — W. H. H.] 
 
 The thought is entirely Jeremiac. See ii. 8 ; 
 xiv. 13-15; xxvii. 14-16, etc. In Lamentations 
 it occurs only once again, iv. 13. — [^JJS'O. After 
 all that has been asserted to the contrary, the 
 evidence from its derivation and use is, that this 
 word means simply a burden, and, as applied to 
 prophecies, an announcement of punishment or 
 vengeance imposed on its object as a burden. 
 The verb t^t^J never means to pronounce, except 
 
 T T 
 
 in a figurative sense, as if the voice were lifted 
 up in loud outcries or shouting: and its deriva- 
 tive niS'p is not used in a single instance where 
 it can only mean a simple declaration or an- 
 nouncement, or where we cannot trace at least a 
 figurative allusion to something that is borne or 
 carried as a burden. It is used twenty-four 
 times of a literal material burden (Num. iv. 15, 
 19, 24, 27 twice, 81, 32, 47, 49; 2 Kings v. 17; 
 viii. 9; 2 Chron. xvii. 11; xx. 25; xxxv. 3; Neh. 
 xiii. 15, 19; Is. xxii. 25; xxx. 6; xlvi. 1. 2; 
 Jer. xvii. 21, 22, 24, 27) ; ten times of a literal 
 mental burden or care (Num. xi. 11, 17 ; Deut. 
 i. 12 ; 2 Sam. xv. 33; xix. 36; 2 Kings ix. 25; 
 2 Chron. xxiv. 27 ; Job vii. 20; Ps. xxxviii. 6; 
 Ez. xxiv. 25) ; twice where it seems to refer to 
 usury laid as a burden on the unfortunate (Neh. 
 V. 7, 10), once for punishment as a burden (Hos. 
 viii. 10), twenty-four times with reference to pro- 
 phecies that may fairly be regarded as of a mina- 
 tory character, laying burdens on their objects 
 (Is. xiii. 1 ; xiv. 28; xv. 1; xvii. 1 ; xix. 1 ; ixi. 
 1, 11, 13; xxii. 1 ; xxiii. 1 ; Jer. xxiii. 33 twice, 
 34, 36 twice, 38 thrice; Ezek. xii. 10; Nah. i. 1, 
 Hab. i. 1; Zech. ix. 1; xii. 1; Mai. i. 1), three 
 times where it is translated by E. V. song, and in 
 the margin carriage, where the idea of the care 
 of religious services involves the idea of a burdtn 
 
90 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 (1 Chron. xv. 22 twice, 27), and twice where it 
 may mean a solemn charge laid as a burden on 
 those to whom it is given (Prov. xxx. 1 ; xxxi. 
 1) A careful examination of these passages, 
 the only ones except our text where the word oc- 
 
 curs, will strongly confirm the oj .nion that 
 ntS'D never means simply effalum, a declaration, 
 an ordinary oracle or prophecy, but always one 
 implying a burden of evil foretold or imprecated 
 — W. H. H.] 
 
 II. 15, 16. 
 
 15 All that pass by clap their hands at thee ; they hiss and wag their head at thf^ 
 daughter of Jerusalem, saying. Is this the city that men call The perfection ot 
 
 16 beauty, The joy of the whole earth? All thine enemies have opened their mouth 
 against thee : they hiss and gnash the teeth : they say, We have swallowed her up ; 
 certainly this is the day that we looked for ; we have found, we have seen it. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 15.— '■IJI ilpiJD Num.xxiv.lO; Jobxxvii.23. See Jer. xxxi.l9 (Ez. xxi. 17) ; xlviii. 26.— Jer. nowhere uses tha 
 I : |t' 
 expression tyXI plt^- He says instead E^X'^S T'Jil, xviii. 16, comp. Ps. xliv. 15.— The t^, relaiivum, which is used 
 
 here, and in ver. 16, evidently because words from the common colloquial dialect are quoted, occurs in Lam. only in these 
 two verses and in iv. 19 ; v. 18, and not at all in Jer. The Prrm. rel. must be regarded as in the accusative of the nearer re- 
 lation (in reference to whom they said it, see my Gr., g70, e.f.), since 10X never directly means to call (see Is. v. 2U; viii. 
 
 12 ; Eccles. ii. 2). The Imperfect here indicates repetition in past times ; see on ^lOX', ver. 12.— rr)''^2- This word-form 
 
 and its variations are frequent in Ezekiel (see xvi. 14 ; xxiii. 12 ; xxxviii. 4 ; xxvii. 24) ; Jeremiah never uses them. See 
 
 Ps. 1. 2, '£3^ SSdO is mentioned as going out of Zion.— Jeremiah (xlix. 25) and Ezekiel (xxiv. 25) use tyityD by itself, each 
 
 - . . T 
 
 only once. 
 
 Ver. IG.— With reference to the transposition of the initial letters ^ and £) in chaps, ii., iii., iv., see the Intr. — Jeremiah 
 never uses nif 3 : in Ez. it is found once, ii. 8.— ^pltJ?. See ver. 15.— The verb p"in occurs only in Job xvi. & ; Ps. xxxvii. 
 
 TT I : It ' "■^ L 
 
 12 : XXXV. 16 ; cxii. 10, and is used only of grinding the teeth, gnashing with the teeth.— ^J^13, vers. 2, 5, 8.— Jer. often uses 
 
 the Piel H^p, viii. 15 (xiv. 19); xiii. 16; xiv. 22: it is not found in Ezekiel. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 In these verses the Poet depicts the scornful 
 triumph of heathen and inimical nations over 
 the ruin of Jerusalem. [Scott: " The idolaters 
 took the words out of the mouth of the Jews, and 
 derided them for glorying in their holy city and 
 its peculiar protection and privileges. The com- 
 bination of scorn, enmity, rage and exultation, 
 which the conquerors and spectators manifested, 
 when gratified by the destruction of Jerusalem 
 and the temple, are set before the reader with 
 peculiar pathos and energy. The whole scene 
 is- presented to his view as in some exquisitely 
 finished historical painting: and the insulting 
 multitudes, who surrounded the Redeemer'is 
 cross, can hardly be forgotten on the occa- 
 fiion."] 
 
 Ver. 15. All that pass by clap their hands 
 at thee; they hiss and v/ag their head — They 
 clap their hands over thee all who pass by the way. 
 They hiss and shake their head. \_All that passed 
 by the way clapped their hands at thee, they hissed 
 and wagged their head. Owen: "Jeremiah re- 
 lates what had taken place, the verbs being in 
 the past tense. Our version is not correct in 
 rendering the verbs in the present tense. The 
 old versions follow the Hebrew." — W. H. H.] 
 Some (Otto, Thknius) interpret this verse as 
 the expression, not of mockery, but of amaze- 
 ment. They say not all who passed by would 
 have mocked. That may be. But the number 
 
 who would not was certainly decreasingly small. 
 
 For by the '^^"1 '"^.•?i*' passers of the way, we must 
 understand travellers and strangers. The Is- 
 raelites were no longer in that empty land, and 
 if there were some, yet to them the destruction 
 of the city w.is only too well known. But clap- 
 ping the hands is a gesture especially of sur- 
 prise. Besides, it is further said, that they hiss. 
 The Hebrew verb V"]^ signifies, it is true, pri- 
 marily to whistle, and does not always express 
 ^<coiu and mockery (see Is. v. 26 ; vii. 18). 
 
 [p^U with S, Is. V. 26; vii. 18; Zech. x. 8, does 
 
 It:' 
 
 not express scorn and mockery, but with /]l it 
 always does, 1 Kings ix. 8; Job xxvii. 23; Jer. 
 xix. 8; xlix. 17 ; 1. 13 ; Ez. xxvii. 36 ; Zeph. ii. 
 15. We whistle to a person to call his attention, 
 but to whistle at or over a person implies deri- 
 sion. — W. H. H.] But the connection here de- 
 cidedly favors the sense of 'scornful hissing.' 
 For p'^B', to hiss, must be taken in the same sense 
 in which it is immediately used in the next verse, 
 which is closely connected with this verse. There 
 it undoubtedly has this sense. Add to this, that 
 the shaking of the head is always an expression 
 of scornful wonderment; Ps. xxii. 8; cix. 25; 
 Job xvi. 4; Is. xxxvii. 22 (2 Kings xix. 21). — • 
 At the daughter of Jerusalem. See ver. 13. 
 [Mark the distinction between thee in the first 
 clause, and the daughter of Jertisalem in the second 
 clause. In the first chapter the city itself is pro- 
 
CHAP. II. 17. 
 
 91 
 
 minent and foremost, and Zion appears as an 
 accessory to her past grandeur, once her crown- 
 ing glory, but now in ruins, the cause of her 
 deepest disgrace and anguish. In this chapter 
 the relations of the two are reversed. Zion 
 here stands forth in ideal personification as the 
 conspicuous figui-e, and the city, the daughter of 
 Jerusalem, once her chief honor and her joy, is 
 now the chiefest cause of her shame and grief. — 
 W. H. H.] — Saying, Is this the city that 
 men call — h that the city of which it used to be 
 said. — The perfection of beauty — Perfect in 
 beauty. The expression is borrowed from Ezekiel, 
 xxvii. 3, where the prophet so calls the city of 
 Tyre, and xxviii. 12, where he indicates the king 
 of Tyre as "perfect in beauty." — The joy of 
 the w^hole earth. This expression is used of 
 Zion in Ps. xlviii. 3. [Alexander: "It is called 
 the joy of the whole earth, as a source of spiri- 
 tual blessing to all nations."] See Is. xxiv. 11. 
 Jerusalem is called the joy of the whole earth, 
 and not merely of the whole land [«'. e., the land 
 of Israel (Owen)], as is evident, because that 
 which is perfect in beauty must be all this, and 
 because all the strangers and travellers passing 
 by it are represented as moved at first with asto- 
 nishment. Joy at her beauty can be reconciled 
 with envy and hatred of her inhabitants. 
 
 Ver. 16. This verse enters into very close 
 connection with the preceding one. It treats of 
 the same malicious rejoicings of the enemies over 
 the downfall of Jerusalem. But it proceeds far- 
 ther in its statements, for while in ver. 15 only 
 the passers-by, in ver. 16 all her enemies are rep- 
 resented as rejoicing and exulting. — All thine 
 enemies opened their mouth against thee. 
 
 All thine enemies gape their mduth at thee [lit., AH 
 of thy enemies opened at thee wide their mouth']. 
 The gaping, or distorting of the mouth, in be- 
 hoof of scornful laughter, is indicated again in 
 iii. 46. where these words are almost verbally 
 repeated, and with the expressions here used in 
 Ps. xxii. 14.— They hiss [lit., they hissed] see 
 ver. 15 — and gnash [lit., ynashed] the teeth. 
 As this is elsewhere an expression of suppressed 
 rage, so here it is an expression of satisfied rage. 
 See Ps. xxxv. 16, 21, 25.— They say [lit.,s«?rf], 
 we have swallow^ed her up — we have de- 
 voured \_i. e., completely destroyed]. Not only 
 those enemies who had personally taken an active 
 part in the destruction of Jerusalem, are in- 
 tended, but all had a share in what some actually 
 achieved, — so far, at least, that all could say, 
 " We have destroyed." — Certainly this is the 
 day that •we looked ior—Yea. /his is the day 
 we have expected. It is evident that the restriction 
 involves an assertion ; if only this day (as the day 
 of total destruction), and no other, could afford 
 satisfaction to the enemies, then certainly that 
 day afforded satisfaction in the highest degree. 
 See Jer. x. 19. — ^"We have found, 'wre have 
 seen it. — Finding, IJXi'O, is the antithesis to 
 seeking, striving. Seeing, UN"!, which involve» 
 the idea of certainty on the ground of seeing with 
 the bodily eyes (see Ps. iv. 7 ; Ixxxv. 8), is the 
 antithesis to merely wishing and hoping. The 
 heaping together of words arranged asyndetically 
 [tve have looked for, we have found, we have seen, — 
 the original can hardly fail to remind us of the 
 famous Veni, vidi, vici] portrays the intensity 
 and the completeness of their satisfaction. 
 
 II. 17. 
 
 17 The Lord hath clone that which he had devised ; he hath fulfilled his word that 
 he had commanded in the days of old : he hath thrown down, and hath not pitied : 
 and he hath caused thine enemy to rejoice over thee : he hath set up the horn of 
 thine adversaries. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 17.— DDT Itl'X HK?^- See Deut. xix. 19.— The verb jrX3, in Jer. only in Kal and in the connection j;V3 J^VI^, 
 t1. 13; viii. 10. In the sense oi absolvere, filling up, it is found Is. x. 12; Zech. iv. 9. — n^ON is found no where else in th« 
 Old Testament. The form H^OX, once very frequent, especially in Ps. cxix., is found neither in Jer. nor Ez. — Piel ni3f 
 Jer. uses very frequently.— Dip 'D'D, seei. 7.— Piel n3ti', twice in Jer.; in Lam.only here.- pp D''in- This expres- 
 sion is not found in Jer.; he only once uses the word \'^T>, see on ver. 3. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 17. [In ver. 17 the direct address to Zion 
 is resumed, and is continued through vers. 18, 
 19.— W. H. H.] The ruin of Zion, as above de- 
 scribed, was not a fortuitous event. God had 
 for a long time foreseen and decreed it as eventu- 
 ally inevitable. Hence the historical catastrophe 
 is nothing else than a realization of a divine 
 purpose. It was, then, God Himself who de- 
 stroyed the holy city and afforded to her enemies 
 the rejoicings of which vers. 15, 16 speak. To 
 
 those verses this verse refers throughout, — Ths 
 Lord hath done that TArhich he had devised 
 
 Jehovah accornplished what He had decreed. See 
 Jer. li. 12, "for Jehovah hath both devised and 
 done that which He spake." Zech. i. 6 expands 
 the same thought by the emphatic expression of 
 the middle term, "Like as Jehovah of hosts 
 thought to do unto us, according to our ways, and 
 according to our doings, so hath He dealt with us.'" 
 [Henderson: "However the enemies of the 
 Jews might tauntingly exult in their destruction 
 of the Jewish metropolis, that disastrous oveni 
 was ultimately to be referred to the purpose of 
 
92 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 Jehovah to punish its inhabitants for their sins "] 
 — He hath fulfilled his word that he had 
 commanded in the days of old. The Lord 
 had, in very ancient times, when He founded the 
 Theocracy, commanded His servants to warn His 
 people that in case of disobedience they would 
 have to suflFer the punishment of destruction. 
 See Lev. xxvi. 14-39; Deut. xxviii. 15-68. 
 [Scott: "This reference to the ancient predic- 
 tions against Israel for their sins, is of great im- 
 portance ; both as it shows that these prophecies 
 were then extant and well known among the 
 Jews, and that they were understood by the pious 
 remnant exactly as we now explain them." — 
 Blayney, followed by Boothroyd, divides the 
 verse thus : Jehovah hath accomplished that which 
 he had devised ; he hath fuljiUed his ivord; tvhat he 
 constituted in days of old, he hath destroyed and not 
 spared; and says, "To this construction we are 
 determined by the metre. The sense is good. 
 
 and perfectly adapted to the place, and corre' 
 spends nearly with what is expressed Jer. xliv. 
 4." All this is true. But, on the whole, the 
 Hebrew accents rather favor the common divi- 
 sion, the metre does not demand the change, and 
 the repetition of the pronoun ^K?X directly befor* 
 its governing verb has a poetical and rhythmical 
 etfect, according to the common division, not to 
 be overlooked. — W. U. H.] — He hath thrown 
 down — He demolished, or destroyed. — And hath 
 not pitied — And pitied not. See^ver. 2. — And 
 he hath caused thine enemy to rejoice over 
 thee — He made the enemy joyful over thee. [Cal- 
 vin : exhilarated their enemies.^ — He hath set up 
 the horn of thine adversaries — He exalted the 
 horn of thine oppressors. This expression is 
 purely poetical. See in particular 1 Sam. ii. 
 10; Ps. Ixxv. 11; xcii. 11 ; cxlviii. 14; 1 Ghron. 
 XXV. 6. 
 
 II. 18, 19. 
 
 18 Their heart cried unto the Lord, O wall of the daughter of Zion, let tears run 
 down like a river day and night : give thyself no rest ; let not the apple of thine 
 
 19 eye cease. Arise, cry out in the night ; in the beginning of the watches pour out 
 thine heart like water before the face of the Lord ; lift up thy hands toward him 
 for the life of thy young children, that faint for hunger in the top of every street. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 18.— noiri- BoERMAL would altogether erase this word. Hodbigant reads: "-if r\3 r*7^n3~^X 'JHX. 
 
 Uerder: ni^n [or JlOn], i. e., exardesce [fervido zelo corripere. So Blayney: Their heart cried out, before Jehovah with 
 
 fervency, O, etc.]. Dathe, after the Syriac : i':; r\3 m'Din 'j'nX-SN- J. D. Michaelis: ''JIX for 'jnX, »■ e., rfajna* 
 
 cor eorum oh fundamenta murorum. Tufilia Zion descendere fac, etc. Thenius would read D^n instead of flDiri- Ewaid, 
 
 in his later editions, reads IjsS 'p^V- He compares Ps. Ixxii. 2, and translates, indefatigahly cry to Jehovah, O wall of the 
 
 daughter of Zionl The reading r\Oin> however, is confirmed by the Sept. Tor this translates, 'E^oijae Kap&ia avriof npo^ 
 
 Kvptof.- Tcivr) Siiuv (taTayaYCTe <os x^'/"-<^PP'"'* SaKpva,etc. JEROME does not change the text, but he translates, Clamavit cor 
 eorum ad Duminum, iuper muros Jilix Ziwi.— The verb J-13 in the sense torpidum, laiiguidutii esse, Niph. examinatwii, ener- 
 
 vaium esse Gen. xlv. 26; Hah. i. 4; Ps. lxxvii.3; xxxviii. 9. The substantive PIJ^B occurs only here: njISn "i- 49. The 
 
 ' T T -: 
 
 construction ^7 ]M>i2 is a very strong, perhaps the strongest, example of the use of the construct case for the mere pur- 
 
 poae of the external connection of words. See Ew., 2287, d, 2; 289, h DD1 is used here in the general sense of cessare. 
 
 8«e Josh. X. 12, 13; Jer. xlvii. 6. .„, ._„ .„LL „ -L 
 
 Ver. 19.— 'D^p. See Jer. ii. 27; xiii. 4, 6; xviii. 2.— ""Jl. See Jer. xxxi. 7; Prov. i. 20.— ^'^J. See i. 2.— E?X^7 
 
 nnOC'N, an expression only found here.— 'Jj] HDJ- See Jer. xvii. 16.— ['"jnx. Hendeeson : " Instead of uldonaf forty of 
 
 Kennicott's, and forty-eight of De Rossi's MSS., together with seven more of his originally, and the Hagiographa printed 
 at Naples, read Jehuvah. The Venetian Greek version has tov octwtoO. On these authorities I have not scrupUHl to follow 
 this reading in the tianslation." Blaynby, BOOIHEOYD, Noies, adopt this reading.— W. H. H.j— ':j''33 ''Xty. not in Jere- 
 
 EXEQETICAf, AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 18. Their heart cried unto the Lord. 
 
 — The first words of ver. 18 have given the com- 
 mentators great trouble. Various readings have 
 been invented. I believe that neither a different 
 reading, nor an artful construction is necessary. 
 Only we must not regard the words, neir hearts 
 cried unto the Lord, as an independent sentence 
 (LcECKENBUBSSER, THENitis) thrown in by the 
 way. Rather, these words constitute the intro- 
 duction and means of transition to all that fol- 
 
 lows down to the end of the chapter. First of 
 all, let it be observed, from the second clause of 
 ver. 18, the Poet lets Zion herself speak with 
 reference to what he had been saying in vers. 
 13-17. This change in the method of recital he 
 precedes with the brief word of introduction 
 above indicated. But what he now puts into the 
 mouth of Zion, as an outpouring of the heart to 
 Jehovah, he divides into two parts. First of all, 
 in vers. 18 b, 19, they to whom the pronoun their 
 
 (the suffix in 037, their heart) refers address the 
 wall and summon it to prayer. In vers. 20-22 
 
CHAP. II. 18, 19. 
 
 93 
 
 the prayer itself follows, which accordingly must 
 be regarded as the prayer of the wall of Zion. 
 They of whom it is said, Their heart cries unto the 
 Lord, are evidently particular individuals. But 
 these persons would not appear before God in 
 their individual capacities, but rather seek the 
 mediation (der idealen Gesammtheit) of the whole 
 church, regarded in its ideal or mystical unity. 
 Thus the cry of their heart comes to God through 
 the mouth (der Gesammtheit) of the united peo- 
 ple [theocratically and by personification re- 
 garded as a unit]. Thus it is explained why the 
 words, Their heart cried unto the Lord, are not im- 
 mediately followed by words addressed to God, 
 but by an appeal to the wall of Zion, which by 
 answering this appeal brings before the Lord that 
 which filled their heart, as mentioned in ver. 18 
 a. That those individuals should thus seek the 
 mediation of the whole church (Gesammtheit) is 
 very natural. For not the individual Israelite, 
 but Israel is the universally historic reservoir 
 and organ of the redeeming grace of God. With 
 Israel is the covenant of grace made, and only as 
 covenant members of Israel have individuals any 
 claim on covenant grace. Now, therefore, as in 
 the Psalms (cxxxv. 19; cxlvii. 12; cxlix. 1-3, 
 etc.) the congregation is often summoned to oifer 
 praise and thanks to the Lord, so here it is sum- 
 moned to make its complaint to the Lord. If 
 this is done here in a very peculiar fashion, by 
 summoning to prayer the wall of Zion as if it 
 were the symbol of the theocratic unity (der 
 Gesammtheit), yet this is justified by the his- 
 torical circumstances out of which our Song 
 originated. Zion stood as long as the walls held 
 togetlier. But as soon as these were broken 
 through, Zion was lost (see Jer. lii. 7, "^^H J^P^i^] 
 then the city was broken up). Is it surprising iliat 
 an Israelite, who had experienced the siege and 
 capture of Jerusalem, should take the wall for 
 all that it enclosed ? This trope is, on the whole, 
 no more bold, than where elsewhere the frontiers 
 are taken for the country they bound, the house 
 for its inhabitants, the purse for its contents. 
 The pre-eminent importance of the wall may be 
 clearly perceived from thei'act that in Nehemiah's 
 time everything depended on its restoration. See 
 Neh. vi. 15, 1(3; xii. :i7-43; comp. Ps. cxxii. 3. 
 If the wall of the daughter of Zion is thus taken 
 for the daughter of Zion herself, it should not 
 surprise us that the same activities are attributed 
 to the wall which belong properly to the daughter 
 of Zion, and that it is exhoited to weep and to 
 pray lor its children. Mourning and exhaustion 
 have already been attributed to it in ver. 8 above, 
 and in i. 4 the ways of Zion are represented as 
 mourning. Further, Is. iii. 2G and xiv. 31 have 
 been correctly referred to, where the predicates 
 of mourning, lamenting and howling are imputed 
 to the gates. [The first words of the verse must 
 refer to the enemies who are the subject of the 
 preceding verse. There is no other nominative 
 expressed to which the pronoun their (the suttix 
 
 in 037) can belong. To refer it back to the 
 passer-by in ver. 15, as Blayney does, is unneces- 
 sary and unnatural. To suppose that it reiers 
 to the pious Jews is to suppose an abrupt un- 
 gramnialicai, and awkward transition, to which 
 there is no parallel in the Lamentations. The 
 
 pronominal suiExes in these Songs are employed 
 with singular accuracy. If we keep in mind the 
 proper meaning of the verb rendered cried, which 
 is to cry out, to vociferate (Deut. xxii. 24, 27; Is. 
 xlii. 2), we readily see the connection. Even 
 these heathen enemies recognized the hand of 
 God in the destruction of Jerusalem, and thei) 
 heart expressed this conviction in loud outcries 
 and shouts addressed to the Ijord, — Adonai the 
 Lord of the heathen, as well as of Israel. This 
 may throw additional light on the words in ver. 
 7, "They have made a noise in the house of Je- 
 hovah, as in the day of a solemn feast." (It is not 
 impossible that the choice of a proper initial 
 word may have led to this continued reference 
 to the heathen.) After the word Lord there 
 ought to be a full stop. This is indicated in the 
 Hebrew by the accent Aathnah, which rarely 
 occurs so near the beginning of a verse. What 
 follows is not what the enemies cried, nor indeed 
 can it be, for the Hebrew word so translated is 
 intransitive. Whenever that word, p^2f is fol- 
 lowed by anything spoken or said, the verb ^DXi 
 to say, is introduced, Ex. v. 8, they cry, saying: 15, 
 xvii. 4; Num. xii. 13; 2 Kings iv. 1; vi. 26, 
 cried — saying: 1 Kings xx. 39; 2 Kings iv. 40; 
 vi. 5, cried — and said. The only seeming ex- 
 ception to this construction, 2 Kings ii. 12, where 
 I'^lisha cried, My father, my father! etc., is due, 
 probably, to the broken disconnected ejacula- 
 tions of the prophet, that could hardly be pre- 
 ceded by the verb "^DX, as if he had said some- 
 thing with deliberation. It must be observed, 
 too, that they were only ejaculations, outcries, 
 that he uttered, and the verb is not followed by 
 
 7X as it is here. But here, where 7X is used, a. 
 long and connected address, like this to the walls 
 of Zion, could not be the object of the verb pi'^i 
 to cry. Had the prophet intended to tell us what 
 the enemies said to God, he would have followed 
 the word pj^2^, they cried with the usual phrase 
 and said. We must take therefore the following 
 touching address to the walls, as the words of 
 the Prophet. We thus avoid the exceeding 
 awkwardness of introducing a long address to 
 the walls of the city with the singular announce- 
 ment that they cried to the Lord, when there is 
 not, according to Naegelsbacii, a single word 
 actually addressed to the Lord, for the prayer in 
 verses 20-22 is the prayer of Zion. We moreover 
 dispense with the necessity of the laliorious dis- 
 tinction between the individual meiubeis of the 
 church and the mystical unity of the untransla- 
 table Gesammtheit. We have here an eloquent 
 poetical address by the prophet to the ruined 
 walls, which by personification and synecdoche 
 represent the afflicted daughter of Zion. — Words- 
 worth: "0 tvall of the daughter of Zion. The 
 Prophet appeals to the luall of Jerusaleoi, as that 
 which once encircled her with defence, but now 
 lies prostrate, and which, being reduced to ruin, 
 was the fittest representative of the city in her 
 desolate condition. He gives a voice to the stones 
 of the wall, and makes them weep for her sor 
 row. We need not be surprised by such a pro- 
 sopopoeia as this, any more than by his exclama- 
 tion, earth, earth, earth (xxii. 29), or by ^h". 
 language of Hab. ii. 11: The stone shall cr>j uul 
 
94 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 of the wall, and the beam shall answer it; or by our 
 Lord's words (Luke xix. 40), If these should hold 
 their peace, the stones would cry out.''' Comp. Ger- 
 LACH, p. 75.— W. H. H.]— Let tears run down 
 like a river day and night. The expression, 
 precisely as it is here, is found no where else. 
 For similar expressions, see iii. 48; Jer. ix. 17; 
 xiii. 17; xiv. 17.— Give thyself no rest; let 
 not the apple of thine eye cease [or leave 
 of, i. e., shedding tears (Noyes)]. The daughter 
 of thine eye. This expression is found elsewhere 
 only in "Ps. xvii. 8. r\3, daughter, is here ap- 
 parently an abbreviation of ^33, entrance, door, 
 gate. Zech. ii. 12. The pupil is the door, the 
 opening of the eye, because in it lies the power 
 of sight. See Fuerst Lex., Gesen. Thes.,Y>. 841. 
 Delitzsch on Ps xvii. 8. [Assem. Ann.: "That 
 •which we call the ball, or apple of the eye, from 
 the spherical figure of it, that the Hebrews call 
 the daughter of the eye, either as the dearest aud 
 tenderest part of it, Deut. xxxii. 10; Prov. vii. 
 2, or from the figures that seem to appear in it, 
 whence also it is termed by the Greeks the damsel, 
 by the Latins the babe of the eye." See Deut. 
 xxxii. 10; Prov. vii. 2, and Alexander ou Ps. 
 xvii. 8. Blayney understands the tear as so 
 called "with great propriety and elegance;" 
 but this is supported by no evidence, and is ren- 
 dered improbable by analogous terms applied 
 to the pupil of the eye, by Hebrews, Greeks and 
 Romans, as indicated above. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 19. Arise, Rise ?//?.— [Gerlacu: "Up." 
 Owen: "The meaning as stated by Gataker, is, 
 Sise from thy bed; for she is exhorted to cry 
 in the night. The Hebrevv word is familiar and 
 precious to us as the same our Saviour uttered, 
 Mark v. 41. " Talitha cumi," kovui, 'Dip. — W. 
 H. H.]— Cry out in the night, in, or at the 
 beginning of the watches. The Hebrews 
 divided the night into three watches ["the fiist, 
 commencing at sunset and extending to what 
 corresponded to our ten o'clock; the second, 
 from ten till two in the morning; and the 
 third from that time till sun rise " ( Henderson )] : 
 
 the middle one was called nyO'Pn n'^OK'^n, the 
 
 middle ivatch. Judges vii. 19; the last n^btJ^X 
 •1p3n, morning watch, Ex. xiv. 24; 1 Sam. xi. 
 11. Since in Judges vii. 19 the beginning of the 
 middle watch is called 'PH 'X tyN"l [lit., head of 
 middle watch'], so nnp'^^/N tJ^KT [lit., head of night 
 u-<ilches\, the beginning of the night watches gene- 
 rally, would be the time of the tirst watch. See 
 Winer, R. W. B., s. v., Nachtwachen. [The 
 opinion that this was the name of \\i(i first watch, 
 eeems to rest entirely on its use here. Yet there 
 is much reason to doubt if it has here that sense. 
 To rise in the first watch of the night, wiiich be- 
 gan before ordinary bed-time, is not very sug- 
 gestive of sleepless grief and anxiety. The pas- 
 sage in Judges favors Gerlacii's conjecture, that 
 the expression denotes the beginning of each suc- 
 cessive watch in the night. He refers to the simi- 
 lar use of ti'NI, head, beginning, in this same 
 verse, and quotes the remark of Michaelis, that 
 niXm E^XT means, not the first of all the open- 
 places, but the beginning or head of every one of 
 
 them. So nnP'i'X ^KT means not the first of th» 
 night watches, but the beginning of each succes- 
 sively. At every watch, or as often as you hear 
 the watchman announce the hour, cry out to God 
 in prayer. — W H H.] The preposition used 
 
 here in Hebrew, ;, means toivards or about that 
 time (see Gen. iii. 8; viii. 11). The sense is, 
 About the time, when formerly every one re- 
 signed himself to hi.* first sleep, the one here 
 addressed should rise up to painful mourning. — 
 Pour out thine heart like w^ater. This 
 seems to denote, first of all, the melting, dissolving 
 of the heart by grief (see Ps. xxii. 15; Iviii. 8; 
 comp. 1 Sam. vii. 6), and then, the open unre- 
 served outpouring of the heart (see Ps. Ixii. 9; 
 xlii. 5; cii. 1). — Before the face of the Lord 
 [Jehovah, see Textual note above]. — Lift up thy 
 hands toward him. Lift up to him thy hands. 
 .•>ee Ps. Ixiii. 5; cxix. 48. [Calvin: "The ele- 
 vation of the hands, in this place and others, 
 means the same thing as prayer; and it has been 
 usual in all ages to raise up the hands to Heaven, 
 and the expression often occurs in the Psalms 
 (xxviii. 2; cxxxiv. 2); aud when Paul bids 
 pi'ayers to be made every where, he says, ' I 
 would have men to raise up pure hands without 
 contention' (1 Tim. ii. 8)."] — For the life of 
 thy young children, lit., /or the souls of, etc. 
 As is seen by the words following [that have 
 fainted, etc.), the object of holding up the hands 
 is, not to save the children (Rosenmueller), but 
 to mourn over their loss. See at vers. 11, 12. 
 Besides, the children are designated, also, as in 
 the verses just named, not as the only, but as a 
 principal object of lamentation. See vers. 20- 
 22. [Gerlach: "To raise the hands is, ac- 
 cording to the fixed use of words, the same thing 
 as to pray, iii. 41 ; Ps. xxviii. 2 ; Ixiii. 5 ; cxxxiv. 
 2 (see 1 Tim. ii. 8), and therefore cannot be 
 understood, with Thenids, as a gesture of 
 the deepest distress. If he would confirm 
 this opinion by the fact, that according to the 
 whole train of thought their fate is already de- 
 termined and can only be mourned over, and 
 therefore an exhortation to pray for the life of 
 the languishing ones would no longer be in 
 place ; then we answer, that in that case no 
 prayer in behalf of the city would any longer be 
 proper, for its fate was fulfilled ; yet it would be 
 proper for those who are found surviving in great 
 want, as in fact a prayer immediately follows on 
 the thought of this calamity in i. 11, 20: See, Je- 
 hovah, how I am distressed. And, further, 
 
 Uay'l^ [for the soul] does not indicate the al- 
 ready ended life (Thenius, De Wette), for which 
 l^Di (the life principle) would be a singular ex- 
 pre.ssion , and, further still, it would be in- 
 consistent with the descriptions given in ver. 11 
 and iv. 4, 5, where not the death of those who 
 ii.-ive fainted, but the distress of those still living, 
 rends the hearts of their mothers." Gerlach s 
 
 opinion is confirmed by the words to Him, V7X. 
 'wy up thy haiuh to him, i. e., to God in prayer. — 
 
 v. H. H.]— That faint for hunger in the top 
 [lit., at the head] of every street — Wli<> have 
 
 fainted for hunger al the opening of every street. 
 See iv. 1 ; Is. Ii. 20 ; Nab. iii. 10. That the 
 
CHAP. II. 20-22. 
 
 wall, in the poet's conception, strictly and only 
 represents Zion, is plainly evident from this, that 
 the Israelitish childi-en are designated as the 
 children of the wall. This could be done with 
 the more propriety from the fact that the wall 
 had a certain motherly character. Did it not 
 embrace the people with its arms ? Did it not 
 
 truly, in a certain mother-like manner, bear them 
 on its bosom? [Wordsworth: "The wall, 
 which girdled Jerusalem, is regarded as a mo. 
 ther, which nurses the inhabitants, her offspring, 
 in her bosom ; and she laments for the children 
 which lie at the end of the streets, extending 
 from one side of the city to the other."] 
 
 II. 20-22. 
 
 20 Behold, O Lord, and consider to whom thou hast done this. Shall the women 
 eat their fruit and children of a span long? shall the priest and the prophet be 
 
 21 slain in the sanctuary of the Lord ? The young and the old lie on the ground in 
 the streets : my virgins and my young men are fallen by the sword : thou hast slain 
 
 22 them in the day of thy anger ; thou hast killed and not pitied. Thou hast called, 
 as in a solemn day, my terrors round about ; so that in the day of the Lord's 
 anger none escaped nor remained : those that I have swaddled and brought up hath 
 mine enemy consumed. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 20. — 771J7. See i. 12; lii. 25. — [OX. Henderson : " □$< is twice used in this verse with the force of a demon- 
 strative interjection." He translates, Behnld! women eat their fruit, infants of a span long ; Behold! priest and prophet are 
 slain, etc. This is manifestly wrong. In the very few instances in which DX has the force of an interjection, it retains a 
 
 conditional sense, and never introduces an unqualified affirmation, or statement of an unquestioned matter of fact (see Hos. 
 xii. 12; Job xvii. 13, 16; Prov. iii. SI; Jer. xxxi. 20). Besides, the future form of the verbs requires here a conditional or 
 
 potential sense.— W. H.H.] — J'^H- Seeii.4. [Henderson: "The nominative to JTrT is tflD and XO J taken singly." The 
 
 -T -T •• I •• • T 
 
 German enables Naegelsbach to preserve the Hebrew construction, Soil erwUrget werden Priester und Prophet ? — W. II. U.] 
 — iy";"3"D. See ii. 7. 
 
 Ver. 21. — -130 J!/. Jeremiah uses 2D^ only once, ni332/J iii- 25 ; but we find K'ri (decidedly arbitrary) in iii. 2, r\23\!^- — 
 I : T . - T T : : • : : ~ "-. 
 
 ylX/- See vers. 2, 10, 11.— ni^flP. Aoc. loc. See my Gr., J 70, a, j3. ["The accusative is used after verbs of rest, in an- 
 
 I V T T 
 
 swer to the question iu/i«re.'" Naegels. (?r.]—?pn ^_J/J. See Jer. li. 22.— jin3£0- See Jer. xi. 19 ; xxv. 34 ; li. 40. The 
 
 •xpression seems to involve an antithesis to D'HStO. ver. 20. 
 
 Ver. 22. — X'^pj^. The imperfect, when compared with the preceding and following perfects, seems to be due entirely 
 
 to the necessities of the acrostic. [Perhaps, the future lu're, as in ver. 20, has a conditional or potential sense. So Owen, 
 who connects it with the words. See, O Jehova)i, and consider. In this case the ) following would have the sense of for ; or 
 
 as in E. V.: so that. Shoiddsl TItou call together, as on a festival, all my terrors from round about! For there was not, etc. 
 Blaynev, in his emendation of the text, overlooks the necessity of a p\ initial.— lj,»i;3 UVD- See ver. 6.— W. H. H.]— 
 ■"jT^T. Piel not in Jeremiah, nor does he use the verb in this sense. See Ezek. xix. 2. — U13- See Jer. v. 3 ; ix. 15 ; xiv. 
 IJ ; xlix. C7, etc. [Blaynet (lollowed by Boothroyd) takes this word for 73 with suffix, and translates : Those whom I had 
 fostered and made to grow were all of them my enemies. The pointing, 012 uot alD, the Versions, and the sense, are all 
 against this.— W. H. H.] 
 
 thou hast done this. [As the pronoun is in- 
 terrogative, that form should be preserved: to 
 whom hast Thou done thus? The question thus 
 interposed between the appeal to God to look, 
 and the description of what He will see if He 
 look, is very forcible and does not mar the sense 
 as the ordinary construction does, but makes it 
 more apparent. — W. H. H.] The Lord had done 
 this, not to a heathen nation, but to the people 
 of His own choice, to whom all the promises of 
 His blessing were given (comp. Gen. xii. 2, 3; 
 XV. 5; xviii. 18; xx. 17, 18; xxvi. 3, 4; xxviii. 
 14, etc.). — ShaU the -women eat their fruit 
 and children of a span long ? — Should wo- 
 men eat their fruit, the children whom they nursed? 
 This is a single indirect question, although it is 
 contained in two members. DX, if [literally 
 translated, the question is, if — shall eat women 
 their fruit, etc.'] is dependent on ^X^, see [see y* 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 The opinion of Chr. B. Michaelis (which Ro- 
 SENMUELLEK Seems to adopt), that the following 
 prayer is set forth by the prophet himself, as a 
 form of prayer (imtar formularis), in behalf of 
 the daughter of Zion, who is exhorted to pray in 
 vers. 18, 19, hardly needs refutation. That the 
 wall of Zion, /. e., Zion herself, utters the prayer 
 in vers. 20-22, is evident, both from the exhorta- 
 tion to prayer in vers. 18, 19, and from the sub- 
 stantial agreement of vers. 20-22 with what vers. 
 18, 19 had indicated as the subject matter of this 
 prayer of lamentation. 
 
 Ver. 20. Behold, O LORD, and consider 
 — See, Jehovah, and look. This exact formula 
 occurs i. 11. The prayer in i. 20-22 (comp. i. 
 9) also begins with See, Jehovah. — To V7hom 
 
96 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 this is so, or should be so]. The sense of the 
 question, moreover, is not, whether it had ever 
 been heard of that mothers had been driven by 
 hunger to eat their own offspring? (Rosenmuel- 
 ler), for then the perfect tense ought to have 
 been used. But what is asked is, whether that 
 thing, speaking in a general way, may be sup- 
 posable, possible, or right; and to express this 
 the imperfect must be used. The explanation of 
 Thenius, " Had they then been obliged to eat, 
 etc., i. e., Had Thy judgments gone so far, that, 
 etc.," is not sufficiently grammatical. What is 
 asked is, whether this thing, generally speaking, 
 would be allowed to happen? The answer to 
 this question would involve another, whether it 
 had been suffered to happen at that time ? But 
 the latter question is not directly contained in 
 the words used. — The crime here mentioned is 
 clearly designated as a punishment to the rebel- 
 lious people; Deut. xxviii. 53; Jer. xix. 9. See 
 2 Kings vi. 28, 29 ; Lam. iv. 10.— Shall the 
 priest^and the prophet be slain in the sanc- 
 tuary of the Lord — Should priest and prophet be 
 duin, etc. [Assem. Ann.: "Should God endure 
 to see His own house polluted with the blood of 
 His own priests and such as bore the name at 
 least of His prophets."] 
 
 D''"<iD, their fruit. The masculine suffix has in- 
 duced most interpreters unnecessarily to change 
 the reading. [As the Sept. has Kapnbv KoiAiaq 
 avTuv, and Ohal. and Arab, similar readings, it 
 has been conjectured that the original text was 
 iP3 '"^p, of which the 3 changed into D is all 
 that remains in the present text. Blajney sug- 
 gests Drri '"^S. Owen has an original device of 
 his own to meet this presumed difficulty. He 
 says, ''Fruit, in the sense of offspring, is applied 
 to men as well as to women. We may take the 
 final mem in D'tJ'J as a pronoun, their wives; the 
 same are meant as in verse 18, their voice \_heart?'\, 
 i. e., the citizens of Jerusalem. Thus the con- 
 struction will be quite grammatical. Should 
 their own wives eat their ojfspiinff.'" That would 
 mean their wives ate, not their own, but their 
 husbands' children. This would furnish preach- 
 ers with a text against polygamy, or the cruelty 
 of step-mothers! IIendekson is satisfied with a 
 magisterial appeal to euphony: "The masculine 
 suffix is adopted instead of the feminine, to agree 
 in form with D'i^J preceding." — W. H. H.] It is 
 not even necessary, with Chr. B. Michaelis, to 
 keep in mind mothers and fathers.. The mascu- 
 line, as the more comprehensive and higher sex, 
 includes the feminine too. See my Gr., § 60, 5; 
 Jer. ix. 19; xliv. 19, 25; Gen. xxxi. 9; Ex. i. 
 "1^ etc. — D'npp occurs only here. It is the ab- 
 stract of the verb npD, which is found only in 
 ver. 22 below. The latter (different from BQ^, 
 Is. xlviii. 13) is a denominative from Hptp, palma, 
 the hand-breadth, palm of the hand, and .seem- 
 ingly ^'igmiiQS palmis yestare (the Latins say ulnis 
 ijestarc). KiMCiii, Vitiiinga, Kalkar would un- 
 derstand the expression of the smoothing of the 
 limbs, as of the swaddling clot lies and bands, 
 with the palm of the hand. [With E. V., chil- 
 dren of a span long, agree Vulq.: parvulos ad men- 
 auram palmm ; Luther: die jUngsten Kindleia 
 
 einer Spanne lang ; Broughton : infants that map 
 he spanned, and Henderson : infants of a span long. 
 The idea of children carried in the hands is 
 adopted by Blayney: children of palms, i.e., 
 "little ones dandled on the hands;" Rosen- 
 mueller: infantes quos suis manibus tractant; 
 Gerlach : die Kinder, die man auf Hdnden 
 triigt ; and Noyes : children borne in the arms. 
 The marginal reading in E. V., children swaddled 
 with their hands, is thus explained in Assem. 
 Ann.: "Because the verb means to 7nete or to 
 stretch out aught with the hand, as Is. xlviii. 13. 
 Hence both the Chaldee Paraphrast and the 
 Rabbins here expound it the children ofswaddiings; 
 the children whose limbs the mothers were wont 
 to stretch out and stroke, as if they were me- 
 ting or measuring them with their hands, to fa- 
 shion them and make them grow straight and 
 proportionable ; and to the same purpose also to 
 make them up with swathing bands; for this 
 word ariseth from a root frequent in the Tal- 
 mudists, for a wrapper of linen, %vherewith to 
 wrap up aught ; as also, for a veil, or apron, or 
 the like, in Scripture, Ruth iii. 15; Is. iii. 22; 
 and this interpretation receiveth further strength 
 from what followeth here, ver. 22." Calvin 
 translates parvulos educationis, which Owen 
 translates, iiifants while nursed, the children of 
 nursings, or nurturjngs [educationum). Booth- 
 royd: their little nurslings. The Sept.: those suck- 
 ing the breasts. After examining these various 
 translations and interpretations, it is obvious 
 that Naegelsbach has expressed the true mean- 
 ing of the word, whatever is its fundamental pri- 
 mitive idea, — the children whom they nursed, — 
 taking the last word in its most comprehensive 
 sense.— W. H H.] 
 
 Ver. 21. The young and the old lie on 
 the ground in the streets — Boy and old man 
 lie on the ground in the streets. [So Gerlach. 
 Blayney, Noyes: The boy and the old man. Hen- 
 derson : Boys and old men. — The verb is prete- 
 rite, and ought to be so translated. He is de- 
 scribing what was then past. The boy and the old 
 man lay on the ground. Blayney : hnve lien. — 
 W. H. H.] — My virgins and my young men. 
 See i. 4, 18; ii. 10; v. 11. — Are — have — fallen 
 by the sword. See Jer. xix. 7; xx. 4; 
 xxxix. 18. [Blayney imagines the metre needs 
 improving, and translates. My virgins and my 
 young men are fallen; with the sword hast thou slain 
 them, in utter disregard of the accents, besides 
 the necessity of supplying a pronoun not ex- 
 pressed.— W. H. H.] — Thou hast slain them 
 in the day of thine anger; thou hast killed 
 and not pitied — Thou hast killed in the day of thy 
 anger (see ver. 2) ; hast slain and not pitied (ver. 
 2). [The asyndetical construction, as in ver. 
 l(j, is vehement and forcible. Thou hast killed, 
 hast slain, hast not pitied. To supply the con- 
 junction and or personal pronoun than weakens 
 tlie sentence. — W. II. H.] 
 
 Ver. 22. Thou hast called — Thou callest to- 
 gether — as in a solemn day — as on a feast-day. 
 See ver. (>. — My terrors round about [lit., 
 from round about, from every direction, so that 
 they were surrounded by them. So Broughton. 
 Calvin : " Here he uses a most appropriate me- 
 taphor, to show that the people had been brought 
 to the narrowest straits; for he says that terrors 
 
CHAP. II. 20-22. 
 
 97 
 
 bad on every side surrounded them, as when a 
 solemn assembly is called. They sounded the 
 trumpets when a festival was at hand, that all 
 might come up to the Temple. As, then, many 
 companies were wont to come to Jerusalem on 
 feast-days— for when the trumpets were sounded 
 all were called — so the Prophet says that terrors 
 had been sent from every part to straiten the 
 miserable people." Owen : "J/y terrors mean my 
 terrifiers, according to the Vulg., the abstract for 
 the concrete. "—W. H. H.] — So that in the day 
 of the LORD'S anger none escaped or re- 
 mained — And there was not on the day of Jehovah's 
 wrath an escaped one or a survivor. [The two words 
 rendered escaped and remained seem to express the 
 same idea ; namely, to escape. As there were 
 multitudes who survived the slaughter and still 
 remained on earth, we cannot translate the second 
 word by either of these terms, unless we regard 
 them as merely hyperbolical. Probably the 
 meaning is that none entirely escaped the eflfects 
 of God's wrath, and we may translate thus, there 
 was not one that escaped or was exempt. This is 
 consistent with the meaning of the verb from 
 which the noun is derived (1^2^, elabi, to escape, 
 to get clear, i. e., of condemnation or punishment), 
 and is confirmed apparently by Jer. xlii. 17, 
 " they shall die by the sword, by the famine, and 
 by the pestilence : and none of them shall remain 
 or escape," i. e., shall escape or be wholly exempt 
 (comp. Jer. xliv. 14), — " from the evil that I will 
 bring upon them." We may understand the 
 phrase in our text as elliptical for the fuller ex- 
 pression as we find it in Jer. xliv. 14, remain or 
 
 escape from the evils, T\}}'\r\ 'JSa CD'Ss^l T"tl^. We 
 may translate the sentence impersonally, there 
 was not that escaped or was exempt. The wrath of 
 the Lord descended on all things and all persons. 
 The city and Zion, the walls and the gates, the 
 sanctuary, palaces and houses, and all the inha- 
 bitants, without regard to age, sex or condition, 
 were involved in a common ruin. — W. H. H.] 
 — Those that I have swaddled — Those I have 
 carried or nursed, see ver. 20 — and brought up, 
 hath mine enemy consumed — viy enemy de- 
 stroyed them. It is evident, tliat the prayer is a 
 prayer of lamentation, and with respect to its 
 object responds to the exhortation contained in 
 ver. 19 by giving the first place to the principal 
 subject of that verse, without restricting itself to 
 that subject, which is, besides, rather intimated 
 than expressed. 
 
 D'^Up, terrors, every where else means shelter, 
 place of accommodation, dwelling, commoratio, pere- 
 grinatio (Gen. xvii.8; xxviii. 4; xxxvi. 7; xxxvii. 
 1; Ex. vi. 4, etc.), granary (Sing. "IIJO, Ps. Iv. 
 16). None of these meanings suits here. It is 
 better therefore to derive it from "^UD, terrifying, 
 which occurs frequently in Jeremiah, vi. 25 ; xx. 
 3,4,10; xlvi. 5; xlix. 29. [Gerlacu: "This 
 word is certainly a designation of the enemy 
 (Vulg.: qui terrent me), but is not to be restricted 
 to them, see i. 20, since the formula so frequent 
 in Jeremiah (vi. 25 ; xx. 4, 10; xlvi. 5 ; xlix. 29) 
 is a general expression for a position threatened 
 on all sides with dangers and the terror pre- 
 vailing therein." — EwALD, according to Gerlach, 
 takes the word in its more common signification 
 
 and insists that it relates to the same persons 
 named in the second and last clauses of the verse. 
 "The word denotes my vdlagers round about, and 
 the inhabitants of the defenceless country towns 
 and villages are intended, who were related to 
 the chief protecting city as farmers, C^-l (Sept. 
 ■Kapomiai). Thus the whole verse plainly alludes 
 to a great event in the days of the siege. All the 
 inhabitants of the country rushed into the prin- 
 cipal city (as happened similarly under Titus) 
 as if a great feast as of old were to be held in 
 tills city, — but alas! it would be in tlie end for 
 them, at the final capture, the great festivity of 
 murder." This makes excellent sense of the 
 whole verse, and is recommended by preserving 
 the same subject throughout the three clauses of 
 the verse, — which cannot be said of Blayney's 
 translation. Thou hast convoked, as on a set day, such 
 as were strangers to me round about, which gives us 
 a new theme in each clause. But, as Gerlach 
 remarks, the analogy of i. 15, the fact that the 
 authority of the Sept. is weakened by its evident 
 mistranslation of the formula in the prophetical 
 book — fear on every side, and the diflSculty of sup- 
 posing that the flight of the country people to the 
 city could be designated as a summons from the 
 Lord, should confirm us in the usual translation 
 of this passage. — W. H. H.] 
 
 DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 
 
 1. Ver. 1. "Olim erat regnum Israelitarum in 
 sublimi, jam sub limo." Forster. 
 
 2. Ver. 1. "When Jeremiah says throughout, 
 the Lord has done it, disregarding what Babel 
 did, he would teach us, when injury is inflicted 
 upon us by the world and men, that we should 
 regard, not the instruments, who could not in- 
 jure the least hair of our heads, but God, who 
 does and ordains it (Lam. iii. 37 ; Am. iii. 6; Is. 
 xlv. 7 ; Sir. xi. 14), that He (1) is impelled to it 
 by our sins, and (2) that He prepares His pun- 
 ishments in Heaven, before they are inflicted on 
 transgressors. This serves to make us patient. 
 Example: Job says not, The Devil, the Chaldeans, 
 the Arabians, did this, but Goil'has done it.'- 
 Cramer, according to Eg. Hunnius, Scr. I., ch. 
 2, p. 45. — [Ver. 1, etc. How hath Jehovah, 
 etc. "The grief is not so much that such and 
 such things are done, as that God has done them ; 
 this, this is their wormwood and gall." "To 
 those who know how to value God's favor, no- 
 thing appears more dreadful than His anger; 
 corrections in love are easily borne, but rebukes 
 in wrath wound deep." Matt. Henry.] 
 
 3. Ver. 1. "Bellarmine is not wise in attempt- 
 ing to establish the worship of images from this 
 text, and especially from Ps. xcix. 5 (Lib. II., de 
 cultu imagiiiuvi, cap. 12). For the Psalmist would 
 not have the pious worship the temple of the 
 Lord, or the ark of the covenant, or mercy-seat. 
 . . . . Therefore, in Hebrew it is not said, Wor- 
 ship His footstool, but Worship at [or ioivard] Hif> 
 footstool. Augustine understands this as said 
 with reference to the human nature of Christ, in 
 which the Logos is adorned with Divine worship 
 {TiaTpeia). But this interpretation rather strength- 
 ens than weakens the argument of the Jesuit."' 
 Forster. 
 
 4. Ver. 1. "If men themselves are not worthy, 
 
98 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 He rejects all their ceremonies. He inquires 
 nothing about stone houses with their splendor, 
 nothing about the external form of the church, 
 but He will prepare for Himself the souls of in- 
 dividuals in the fire for all eternity." Died- 
 
 KICH. 
 
 5. Ver. 2. "The Abbot Rupert, in his com- 
 mentary on the books of Kings (B. V., ch. 14) 
 understands the fall of Jezebel out of the window 
 (2 Kings ix. 33), — as well as the passage before 
 us, which is expressed in the Vulgate thus, "the 
 Lord hath cast down headlong ... all that was 
 beautiful in Jacob," — as a prophecy of the ven- 
 geance which Israel has incurred, for the shed- 
 ding of the blood of Christ ; and he then says, 
 ' That fall has been heard of throughout the 
 whole world. Lo ! that synagogue which slew 
 Christ, where is it? Truly, whatever seems to 
 remain may be compared to what the dogs left of 
 Jezebel's body.' " Ghisleb.,p. 70. 
 
 6. Ver. 2. "Paschasius Radbertus observes 
 on this passage, that liingdom, king, priest. Tem- 
 ple, stronghold, etc., may be nothing else than 
 'as it were, some great prophet or prophecy' 
 contained in earthen vessels. 'But now that 
 Christ has come, since the various predictions 
 concerning Him, which were contained in tliose 
 vessels, have been fulfilled, they have all been 
 cast down and broken, destroyed and scattered, 
 polluted and profaned, that all the mystical and 
 unutterable secrets which were concealed in them 
 should be made apparent to the whole world, 
 being revealed more clearly than light.' " Ghis- 
 
 LER. 
 
 7. Ver. 2. He hath polluted, etc. " This is, 
 truly, the result of the profanation of the Divine 
 name and majesty, which was at times extremely 
 common even among tlie chief men ; and this re- 
 sult is in accordance with the rule of divine jus- 
 tice in Wisdom xi. 17 — Wherewithal a man sin- 
 neth, by the same also shall he be punished." 
 FoESTER. "The secret of their strength was 
 taken away from the people in the persons of 
 their princes, as Samson lost his strength when 
 he had violated his vow." Diedrich. — [Ver. 2. 
 Prayer. "Grant, Almighty God, that as Thou 
 settest before us at this day those ancient exam- 
 ples by whicli we perceive with what heavy pun- 
 ishments Thou didst chastise those whom Thou 
 badst adopted, — grant, that we may learn to 
 regard Thee, and carefully to examine our whole 
 life, and duly consider how indulgently Thou hast 
 preserved us to this day, so that we may ever pa- 
 tiently bear Thy chastisements, and with a hum- 
 ble and sincere heart flee to Thy mercy, until 
 Thou be pleased to raise up Thy Church from 
 that miserable state in which it now lies, and so 
 to restore it, that Thy name may, through Thine 
 only-begotten Son, be glorified throughout the 
 whole world. Amen." Calvin.] 
 
 8. Ver. 3. "This consideration can and ought 
 to check pride and arrogance, and prevent us from 
 fiercely erecting our horns, being mindful of that 
 notorious saying : 
 
 Cornua quifadunt, ne cornna ftrre, rteuienX. 
 
 And from Zech. i. 18-21 we learn, that the Lord 
 can easily raise up smiths lo break the horns of 
 those who are fierce and insolent." Forstek. 
 0. Ver. 5. "God has made CUrist a horn of 
 
 salvation to His church, that it should receive 
 from His fulness grace, blessing, strength and 
 power Whoever will not make use of Christ for 
 this purpose, his Cfirnal ability will soon go to 
 wreck and ruin. Luke i. 69." Starke. 
 
 10. Ver. 5. "When Judea denied the mystery 
 of oiiv Lord's incarnation, which the Gentiles 
 believed, the princes of Judea fell into contempt, 
 and these Gentiles, who had been oppressed 
 while guilty of unbelief, were elevated into the 
 liberty of the true faith. But Jeremiah, fore- 
 seeing long before it happened this fall of the 
 Israelites, says, The Lord has become as if He 
 were an enemy. He has overthrown Israel, He has 
 overthrown all his walls, He has overthrown His 
 defences." Grfg. Papa, Lib. XL, Moral. Cap. 10, 
 quoted by Ghisler., p. 70. 
 
 11. Ver. 5. n-JXl H'JNP. "The Vulgate 
 
 _t;-:|- t--: |t 
 
 version has, humiliatam et humiliationem [one 
 humbled and humiliation]. Avenarus inter- 
 prets invectum et invectionem [attack and as- 
 sault by sea] and explains it as relating to naval 
 conflicts and the various methods of assaulting 
 an enemy : since both words are from anah, which 
 properly signifies to be carried in ships." Forsier. 
 [Note. — Forster either misquoted the Vulgate, 
 or intended only to give the sense, in his under- 
 standing of it. The Vulgate is humiliatmn et hu- 
 miliatam; which the Douay translates "and hath 
 multiplied in the daughter of Judea the afllicted, 
 both men and women." The Vulg. is a translation 
 of the Sept.: /cat inXifivvev rf) Ovyarpl 'lowJa tottec- 
 voi/iEVov Kal TeTaneivufiEVTjv. — W. H. H.] 
 
 12. Vers. 4, 6. "Here a distinction between 
 the evilof c?-!77je and the ey\\ of punishment is to be 
 observed. God is not the efficient cause of the 
 evil of crime. The opinion of Peter Martyr, in 
 his Commentary on the first chapter of Romans, 
 is, therefore, impious and horrible, — ' I cannot 
 deny that God is in every way the cause of sin.' 
 God is, however, the chief cause of the evil of 
 punishment, being a just Judge and the avenger 
 of crimes. In this sense the inimical acts of the 
 Babylonians are here attributed directly to Him." 
 
 FiiRSTER. 
 
 13. Vers. 6, 7. "The Lord, who never sufi"er8 
 Himself to be forgotten ' causes our solemn feasts 
 and the Sabbaths of our rest to be forgotten,' not 
 because the rites of our religion do not please 
 Him, but because the former tabernacle of God 
 or the temple of the Holy Ghost in us is pro- 
 faned, and there is now no place in which those 
 rites may be so oH'ered as to please God." Pas- 
 CHAS. Radbertus by Ghisler., p. 79. 
 
 14. Vers. 6, 7. " The Romanists, therefore, err 
 when they pretend that Rome is tlie fixed and 
 immovable seat of the church. For although 
 the Catholic and universal church cannot cease 
 to exist (Matt. xvi. 18), yet that particular 
 churches have perished and can perish, experi- 
 ence testifies, yea Rome herself testifies by an 
 example in her own history. . . . What is here 
 related of the temple at Jerusalem, that it should 
 assuredly be demolished and overthrown, has 
 happened to temples of Christ at the hands of the 
 Turks. It is a fact also especially memorable, 
 that on the 29th day of May, in the year 1453, 
 the Turks having assembled and taken Constanti- 
 nople, the temple of Sophia, esteemed so sacred, 
 was turned into a horse-stable. And t as in 
 
CHAP. II. 
 
 99 
 
 what was long ago written in Ps. Ixxviii. 59-64, 
 and also Ps. Ixxx. 13, 14." Forster. — [Ver. 7. 
 " Had he only spoken of the city, of the lands, of 
 the palaces, of the vineyards, and, in short, of 
 all their possessions, it would have been a much 
 lighter matter; but when he says that God had 
 counted as nothing all their sacred things, — the 
 altar, the Temple, the ark of the covenant, and 
 festive days, — when, therefore, he says, that 
 God had not only disreg.irried, but had also cast 
 away from Him these things, which yet espe- 
 cially availed to conciliate His favor, the people 
 must have hence perceived, except they were be- 
 yond measure stupid, how grievously they had 
 provoked God's wrath against themselves ; for 
 this was the same as though heaven and earth 
 were blended together. Had there been an up- 
 setting of all things, had the sun left its place 
 and sunk into darkness, had the earth heaved up- 
 wards, the confusion would have hardly been 
 more dreadful, than when God put forth thus His 
 hand against the sanctuary, the altar, the festal 
 days, and all their sacred things. But we must 
 refer to the reason why this was done, even be- 
 cause the Temple had been long polluted by the 
 iniquities of the people, and because all sacred 
 things had been wickedly and disgracefully pro- 
 faned. We now, then, understand why the Pro- 
 phet enlarged so much on a subject in itself suf- 
 ficiently plain." Calvin.] 
 
 15. Ver. 7. "Wherewith one sins, therewith 
 is he punished (Wis. xi. 17). But because the 
 most heinous sins had been perpetrated at the 
 altar and Divine worship, so now at the altar the 
 severe chastisement is inflicted, that they must 
 be deprived of it." Cramer. — [Ver. 7. They 
 have made a noise in the house of Je- 
 hovah — " Why did He grant so much license 
 to these profane enemies? even because the Jews 
 themselves had previously polluted the Temple, 
 so that He abhorred all their solemn assemblies, 
 as also He declares by Isaiah, that He detested 
 their festivals. Sabbaths and new moons (i. 13, 
 14). But it was a shocking change, when ene- 
 mies entered the place which God had conse- 
 crated for Himself, and there insolently boasted, 
 and uttered base and wicked calumnies against 
 God ! But the sadder the spectacle, the more de- 
 testable appeared the impiety of the people, which 
 had been the cause of so great evils. * * * That 
 the Chaldeans polluted the Temple, that they 
 trod under foot all sacred things, all this the Pro- 
 phet shows was to be ascribed to the Jews them- 
 selves, who had, through their own conduct, 
 opened the Temple to the Chaldeans and exposed 
 all sacred things to their will and pleasure." 
 Calvin.] 
 
 16. Ver. 9. "God is careful to punish con- 
 tempt of His word by taking away that word. 
 The curse which they chose, that is come to them ; 
 the blessing they did not choose, that is far from 
 them, Ps. cix. 17." Cramer. 
 
 17. Vers. 1-10. "Although God, properly 
 speaking, allows Himself to repent of nothing, 
 and His gifts and callings admit of no change 
 (Rom. xi. 20), yet it is evident from this passage, 
 that He is bound to no particular people, espe- 
 cially if that people prove to be godless and un- 
 thankful towards Him. He had chosen the peo- 
 ple of Israel for His own peculiar people, Jerusa- 
 
 lem for His dwelling, where He had, as it were 
 His fire and His hearth (Is. xxxi. 9), and had 
 lifted it up to Heaven ; but when it became un- 
 grateful aud disobedient. He considered not all 
 tuis, but cast down to the earth all the glory of 
 Israel, laid waste His own tabernacle, destroyed 
 His dwelling, overthrew His altar. For God is 
 not only merciful and kind, but also an angry 
 and just Judge, who will not let iniquity go un- 
 punished, and makes His chastisements the more 
 severe in proportion to the kindness He has shown 
 to a people, when they are ungrateful and god- 
 less. This should be a solemn warning to us." 
 Wiirtemb. Summ. ["Even those doctrines, or- 
 dinances and regulations, which are most exactly 
 scriptural, when scrupulously retained by men 
 destitute of the Spirit of God, are but'a lifeless 
 carcass of religion: and when made a cloak for 
 iniquity, God abhors them. So that, in the day 
 of His wrath for national wickedness, He will 
 despise temples and palaces, kings and priests, 
 establishments and forms of every kind." Scott.] 
 
 18. Ver. 10. They have cast up dust upon 
 their heads, etc. Luctuspro luxu. Forster. 
 
 19. Ver. 11. "EflFusion of the liver is carnal 
 mortification." Bonavbntura, quoted by Gnia- 
 
 LER.,p. 91. 
 
 20. Ver. 13. " When God punishes His people 
 on account of their sins. He punishes them more 
 severely than He does other peoples. It may be 
 said of Him, The dearer the child, the harder 
 the rod." Osiandri Bible in Starke. [" When 
 we wish to alleviate grief, we are wont to bring 
 examples which have some likeness to the case 
 before us. For when any one seeks to comfort 
 one in illness, he will say, 'Thou art not the first 
 nor the last, thou hast many like thee ; why 
 shouldest thou so much torment thyself; for this 
 is a condition almost common to mortals.' * * 
 The Prophet, then, means that comforts com- 
 monly administered to those in misery, would be 
 of no benefit, because the calamity of Jerusalem 
 exceeded all other examples ; as though he had 
 said, 'No such thing has ever happened in the 
 world; God had never before thundered so tre- 
 mendously against any people.' * * Great as the 
 sea is thy breach; that is, 'Thy calamity is the 
 deepest abyss. I cannot then find any in the 
 whole world whom I can compare to thee, for thy 
 calamity exceeds all calamities ; nor is there any- 
 thing like it that can be set before thee, so that 
 thou art become a memorable example for all 
 ages.' But when we hear the Prophet speaking 
 thus, we ought to remember that we have suc- 
 ceeded in the place of the ancient people. Aa 
 then, God had formerly punished with so much 
 severity the sins of His chosen people, we ought 
 to beware lest we in the present day provoke 
 Him to an extremity by our perverseness, for 
 He remains ever like Himself." Calvin.] 
 
 21. Ver. 14. " Preachers, so soothing, are 
 smooth-preachers and dumb dogs, who bring 
 great and irreparable injury to a whole country, 
 for the sun shall go down over such prophets and 
 the day shall be dark over them (Mic. iii. 6). 
 And although they may receive for a long time 
 good-will and favor, money and encouragement 
 from men, yet tiiey lose, together with their 
 hearers who delight in such accommodating 
 ministers, all " '*-v f' m the living God : Gal. i. 
 
100 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 10; James iv. 4." Cramer according to Eg. 
 HuNNius, Ser. 3, ch. 2. p. 64. [" They had 
 wilfully drunk sweet poison." Calvin. — Prayer. 
 "Grant, Almighty God, that though Thou chas- 
 tisest us as we deserve, we may yet never have 
 the light of truth extinguished among us, but 
 may ever see, even in darkness, at least some 
 sparks, which may enable us to behold Thy pater- 
 nal goodness and mercy, so that we may be es- 
 pecially humbled under Thy mighty hand, and 
 that being really prostrate through a deep feel- 
 ing of repentance, we may raise our hopes to 
 Heaven, and never doubt that Thou wilt at length 
 be reconciled to us when we seek Thee in Thine 
 only-begotten Son. Amen." Calvin.] 
 
 22. Vers. 15, 16. " He who suffers an injury, 
 need not mind mockery. It is the Devil's special 
 delight to make a mock of the church and of all 
 the pious, so that the godless are known by their 
 great Ahs and Ohs (Wis. v. 3) ! Let not, how- 
 ever, ridicule cause us to waver, but let us re- 
 main firm and faithful to God. For blessed are 
 ye when men, for My sake, revile and persecute 
 you and say all manner of evil againstyou (Matt. 
 V. 11). For God can easily and speedily take 
 away again such reproach and put to silence the 
 triumphing of the wicked, and apply to them the 
 song — Mine eyes will see that they shall be trod- 
 den down as the mire of the streets (Mio. vii. 
 10)." Cramer quoted by Eg. Hunnius, Ser. 4, 
 ch. 2, p. 73). 
 
 23. Vers. 14-16. " This is, in truth, the root of 
 the calamity, that the prophets in the service of 
 the people had preached in accordance with carnal 
 pleasures; they had not disclosed but concealed 
 the misdeeds of the people, and thus had preached 
 the people out of their country, and into captivi- 
 ty. How then was this ? Had they invented new 
 precepts? made another catechism? No, nothing 
 at all of this sort! But it sufficed for the pur- 
 pose of destruction, that they mistook the Gospel, 
 and exercised no control over the people in con- 
 formity therewith, but instead of that practised 
 a false policy. Now the enemies of Jerusalem 
 and of God's people mock and imagine that all 
 the glorious promises of the Word of God of a 
 kingdom of grace among men have come to 
 naught. They imagine that they have now made 
 it evident by their power, that the mj'stery of 
 God's grace and election is naught. Poor fools! 
 They know not that God is in all this ; they know 
 nothing of that God, who suffers with us and for 
 us, and leads us through suflfering to glory." 
 
 DiEDlUCH. 
 
 24. Ver. 17. "When we experience God's judg- 
 ment and chastisements on account of our sins, 
 we ought always to look back (1) on our sins, 
 (2) on God's frequent warnings of punishment, 
 (8) on His unchangeable faithfulness, and (4) on 
 His great power and His right hand which can 
 change all things, Ps. Ixxvii. 11 ; Dan. ix. 8 ; 
 Ps. li. 5." Cramer, quoted by Eg. Hunnius, Ser. 
 4, Ch. II., pp. 74 ff.— [Ver. 17. He hath ful- 
 filled His word that He had commanded 
 in the days of old. — " Had the Prophet touched 
 only on t he secret counsel of God, the Jews might 
 have been in doubt as to what it was. And cer- 
 tainly as our minds cannot penetrate into that 
 deep Jibyss. in vain would he have spoken of the 
 hidJen judgments of Gol. h wxi-i, tlierefore, 
 
 necessary to come down to the doctrine, by which 
 God, as far as it is expedient, manifests to us 
 what would otherwise be not only hidden, but 
 also incomprehensible ; for were we to inquire 
 into God's judgments, we would sink into the 
 deep. But when we direct our minds to what 
 God has taught us, we find that He reveals to us 
 whatever is necessary to be known ; and though 
 even by His word, we cannot perfectly know His 
 hidden judgments, yet we may know them in part, 
 and as I have said, as far as it is expedient for 
 
 us Let us then hold to this rule, even to 
 
 seek from the Law and the Prophets, and the 
 Gospel, whatever we desire to know concerning 
 the secret judgments of God ; for were we to turn 
 aside, even in the smallest degree, from what is 
 taught us, the immensity of God's glory would 
 immediately swallow up all our thoughts ; and 
 experience sufficiently teaches us, that nothing is 
 more dangerous and even fatal than to allow our- 
 selves more liberty in this respect than what be- 
 hooves us. Let us then learn to bridle all curi- 
 osity when we speak of God's secret judgments, 
 and instantly to direct our minds to the word 
 itself, that they may be in a manner inclosed 
 therein." Calvin.] 
 
 25. Ver. 18. " In this exhortation, the re- 
 quisites of true and ardent prayer are shown. 
 (1) The first of these is the cry of the heart to God, 
 by which devoutness, or the earnest and ardent 
 desire of the heart is denoted. For, as Cyprian 
 says, in his 12th Sermon on the Lord's Prayer, 
 God hears not the voice, but the heart. And it 
 is commonly said. When the heart does not pray, 
 then the tongue labors in vain. (2) Tears, i. e., 
 by metonomy, true penitence, of which tears are 
 signs, as appears in the case of the sinful woman 
 (Luke vii. 38), and of Peter (Luke xxii. 62). 
 And well-known is that saying of the orthodox 
 Father, The tears of sinners are angels' bread 
 and angels' wine." Forster. 
 
 26. Vers. 18-22. "Here we have alesson, — when, 
 to whom, and how, we ought to pray. We should 
 pray always and not faint, as Christ teaches us 
 by a parable (Luke xviii.), but especially when 
 there is a great and immediate necessity, as Jere- 
 miah did here, and David, The anguish of my 
 heart is great, bring me. Lord, out of my dis- 
 tresses (Ps. XXV. 17). To this Lord the prophet 
 Jeremiah here points the people. God Himself 
 calls us to come to Him only, and says, Call upon 
 Me in the day of trouble, I will deliver thee and 
 thou shalt glorify Me (Ps. 1. 15). Not alone 
 should your mouth pray, but, says Jeremiah, let 
 your heart cry to God. For the Lord is near to 
 those who call upon Him, to those who call upon 
 Him with earnestness (Ps. cxlv. 18). We should 
 presentbefore Him circumstantially our necessity 
 and solicitudes, with tears and sighs, as Jere- 
 miah here directs. For although God well knows 
 beforehand what distresses us and what we need, 
 before we tell Him (Matt. vi. 8), yet the recital 
 of our pressing necessity serves to make us more 
 earnest in prayer; for God will have those who 
 pray, such as those who worship Him in sj^irit 
 and in truth (John iv. 23)." M'urt. Summaruii. 
 
 27. Ver. 19. Arise, cry out in the night. 
 ■ —"The prayer of night — how readily it rises to 
 God the only Judge, jind to the Holy Angel who 
 undertakes to present it before the Heavenly al- 
 
CHAP. II. 20-22. 
 
 101 
 
 tar! How grateful and bright, colored with the 
 blush of humility ! How serene and placid, dis- 
 turbed by no clamor or bustle! And last of all, 
 how pure and sincere, sprinkled with no dust of 
 earthly care, incited by no praise or fljittery of 
 beholders!" Bernard, Serm. 86 on the Canticles, 
 in Ghisler., p. 108. 
 
 28. Ver. 20. Behold, O Jehovah, and con- 
 sider. — " It is most proper, when any one is 
 overwhelmed with affliction, that he keep it not 
 entirely to himself, but disclose it to such per- 
 sons as may come to his relief in the way either 
 of help or of comfort. But to no one can we 
 better and more advantageously lament our dis- 
 tresses and solicitudes, than to our dear God, 
 for He is our confidence, a strong tower from 
 tur enemies (Ps. Ixi. 4)." Cramer quoted by Eg. 
 HuNNius, Ser. 4, ch. 2, p. 78. — [Prayer. "Grant, 
 Almighty God, that as Thy Church at this day is 
 oppressed with many evils, we may learn to raise 
 up not only our eyes and our hands to Thee, but 
 also our hearts, and that we may so fix our 
 attention on Thee as to look for salvation from 
 Thee alone ; and that though despair may over- 
 whelm us on earth, yet the hope of Thy goodness 
 may ever shine on us from Heaven, and that, 
 relying on the Mediator whom Thou hast given 
 us, we may not hesitate to cry continually to 
 Thee, until we really find by experience that our 
 prayers have not been in vain, when Thou, pity- 
 ing Thy church, hast extended Thy hand, and 
 given U3 cause to rejoice, and hast turned our 
 mourning into joy, through Christ our Lord. 
 Amen." Calvin.] 
 
 29. Ver. 21. The young and the old. — 
 "When general judgments proceed from God, the 
 old and the young must suffer together: the old, 
 because they have not rightly educated the 
 young : the young, because they have imitated 
 the wickedness of the old." Cramer. 
 
 30. [Vers. 19-22. " Comforts for the cure of 
 these lamentations are here sought for and pre- 
 scribed. The two most common topics, that their 
 case is neither singular nor desperate, are here 
 tried, but laid by, because they would not hold. 
 No wisdom or power of man can repair the deso- 
 lations of such a broken, shattered state. It is 
 to no purpose, therefore, to administer these 
 common cordials ; therefore, the method of cure 
 prescribed is, to refer her to God, that by peni- 
 tent prayer she may commit her case to Him, and 
 be instant and constant in her supplications, ver. 
 19. ^ Arise out of thy despondency, try out in the 
 night, watch unto prayer; be importunate with 
 God for mercy, be free and full, be sincere and 
 serious ; open thy mind, spread thy case before 
 the Lord; lift up thine hands towards Him in holy 
 desire and expectations; beg for the life of thy 
 young children. Take with you words, take with 
 you these words, ver. 20. Prayer is a remedy 
 for every malady, even the most grievous. And 
 our bueiness in prayer ia not to prescribe, but to 
 
 subscribe to the wisdom and will of God ; Lord^ 
 behold and consider, and Thy will be done." Henri: 
 
 HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 
 
 1. Vers. 1-10. As a warning against a proud 
 confidence of security, our text can be used for 
 a sermon on this theme. — The judgment on tha 
 members of the old covenant is a solemn toarning for 
 the members of the new covenant. I. The judgment. 
 
 1. Who judges? The Lord. 2. How does He 
 judge ? With rigorous righteousness. 3. Why 
 docs He judge? Because His wrath has been 
 provoked by sins. II. The warning. 1. They 
 were the natural branches: we engrafted ones 
 (Rom. xi. 24). They had for their part only the 
 revelation of the law ; we the revelation of grace. 
 
 2. From this it follows that we have to expect a 
 similar judgment, not only with the same, but 
 assuredly with greater certainty. 
 
 2. Ver. 9. The blessing of a well ordered political 
 and ecclesiastical condition of affairs. I. What be- 
 longs to such order? 1. That the civil magis- 
 tracy administer the law. 2. That the teachers 
 of God's word rightly divide it. II. What are 
 the salutary fruits thereof? 1. In a temporal 
 point of view. Order, Right and Righteousness, 
 peace and general prosperity. 2. In a spiritual 
 point of view. Glory to God in the highest, peace 
 on earth and good will from God to men. 
 
 3. Vers. 11, 12. These verses could be preached 
 upon in a time of severe famine. I. Describe the 
 actual condition of things. The distress: 1, of the 
 children; 2, of the parents. II. Exhort to lively 
 sympathy and the actual manifestation of pity. 
 
 4. Vers. 13, 14. The hurt of the daughter of 
 Zion. 1. Wherein it consists. 2. Its causes. 3. 
 Its cure. 
 
 5. Vers. 13, 14. The immense responsibility of the 
 office of the preacher. 1. To whom are the preachers 
 responsible (and whose word have they therefore 
 to publish) ? 2. What blessings may they be the 
 authors of by a constant consideration of this 
 responsibility ? 3. What injury may they do by 
 not considering the same ? 
 
 6. Vers. 15, 16. Warning against malicious joy 
 in the misfortunes of others. We understand this in 
 a double sense; whilst we (1), warn against such 
 conduct as may make one a subject of the mali- 
 cious joy of others; (2), we warn against mali- 
 cious exultation over the misfortunes of others. 
 
 7. Vers. 16, 17. The impressive sermon which is 
 contained in great calamities. I. These warn us ; 
 
 1, against the pride which goes before a fall; 
 
 2, against malicious joy over the fall of our 
 neighbor. II. They instruct us, 1, to consider 
 the warnings of the Lord ; 2, to recognize plain- 
 ly His hand in the blows which befall men. 
 
 8. Vers. 18-22. l%e prayer of the distressed. 1. 
 It comes out of the heart. 2. It is the expres- 
 sion of deep pain. 3. It is not satisfied with few 
 words. 4. It is directed confidently to the Lord 
 
102 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 Chapter III. 
 
 THH MIDDLE SONG CONSTITUTING THE CLIMAX OF THE POEM : ISRAEL'S BRIGHTER DAY OF CONSOLA- 
 TION CONTRASTED WITH THE GLOOMY NIGHT OP SORROW EXPERIENCED BY THE SERVANT OF GOD 
 [as REPRESENTED BY JEREMIAH HIMSELf]. 
 
 This Song, which as the third one of the five holds the middle place, is the culmination point of the whole book, and thus 
 affords a strong art^iiment for the opinion, that the whole book is constructed on one carefully considered plan. It is the 
 culmination point, both as to its matter and as to its form. As to its matter, because we have here the sublimest couceji- 
 tions of suffering. As to its form, because here the art of the Poet displays itself in full splendor. Tliis appears, first of all, 
 in the alphabetical arrangement. Whilst the other songs have only twenty-two alphabetically arranged verses, this on» 
 contains sixty-six verses, arranged in triplets, the three verses of each triplet beginning with the same letter. Each verse 
 is a distich, composed of a rising and falling inflection. The ternary division is ob.servable not merely in reference to the 
 Terses beginning with the same initial letter, but with regard to the arrangement of the whole : for the whole Song is na- 
 turally divided into three parts. The first part embraces vers. 1-18 : the second, vers. 19-42: the third, vers. 43-66. 
 
 PART I. 
 
 III. 1-18. 
 
 N Ver. 1. I am the man who saw affliction 
 
 By the rod of His wrath. 
 K Ver. 2. He led me and brought me 
 
 Into darkness and not light. 
 Ji{ Ver, 3. Surely against me He turned His hand 
 
 Again and again the whole day long. 
 
 ^ Ver. 4. He caused my flesh and my skin to waste away, 
 
 He broke my bones. 
 ^ Ver. 5. He built around and encompassed me 
 
 With bitterness and distress. 
 ^ Ver. 6. He caused me to dwell in dark places, 
 
 As the dead of old. 
 ^ Ver. 7. He hedged me in that I should not go forth, 
 
 He made my chain heavy. 
 J Ver. 8. Also, lest I should cry and call for help, 
 
 He shut out my prayer. 
 Jl Ver. 9. He hedged in my ways with hewn stone, 
 
 He made my paths crooked. 
 "1 Ver. 10. A lurking bear was He to me — 
 
 A lion in ambush. 
 1 Ver. 11. He drove me aside — He tore me in pieces — 
 
 He left me sufteriug and alone. 
 "1 Ver. 12. He bent His bow, and set me 
 
 As the mark for the arrow. 
 n Ver. 13. He shot into my reins 
 
 The sons of His quiver, 
 n Ver. 14. I became a laughing-stock to all my people. 
 
 Their song all the day. 
 n Ver. 15. He filled me with bitter things. 
 
 He made me drunk with wormwood. 
 ") Ver. 16. He broke my teeth with pebbles. 
 
 He covered me with ashes. 
 1 Ver. 17. Thou didst thrust me away from peace: 
 
 I forgot good. 
 1 Ver. 18. Then I said, My confidence and my hope 
 
 Are perished from Jehovah ! 
 
 ANALYSIS. 
 
 ^fler the first triad of verses^ containinrj the theme, the Poet, or rather the person ivhom the Poet represents 
 as speaking [and who ivill be understood as aluun/s intended, where the sense allows it, when for the 
 sake of brevity we sai/ "the Poet,") describes what he had suffered phi/sicalli/, vers. 4, 5; and in 
 regard to light and freedom, vers. 6, 7; how the Lord had rejected his prayer, ver. 8; that up his 
 
CHAP. III. 1-3. 
 
 103 
 
 way, ver. 9; attacked and worried him like a bear or lion, vers. 10, 11 ; made him a mark for hit 
 arrows, like an archer, piercing into his very soul, vers. 12, 13; how he had thus become an object of 
 scorn to the people, ver. 14; and drunk ivith bitterness, ver. 15; and how, as it were, they had given 
 him pebbles to bite and covered him icith ashes, ver. 16. In vers. 17, 18, he expresses the sense of 
 these images in literal language ; God has deprived him of peace and happiness, till he was well nigh 
 compelled to throw away his confidence in God. Thus ends this first part, in which the name of the 
 Lord is not mentioned except as the last wordof \eT. 18, where it appears with peculiar ernphasis and, as 
 it were, with a grating dissonance. It is to be observed, however, that in the whole of this first part, 
 only those sorrows which God had tent upon His servant are spoken of; or rather, all sorrows which befall 
 him are made to appear as Divine temptations. Hence the suppression of JeliovaK s name tdl the very 
 close ; where at length it is announced, that it may be more dreadfully apparent whom it was that the 
 Poet was on the point of renouncing. 
 
 destruction of Jerusalem is described as the act 
 of God, so in this chapter the Poet ascribes all his 
 sorrows to God as their author. He represents 
 them as divine temptations. There is only this dif- 
 ference, that whilst in chap, ii., the name of God 
 is frequently mentioned (''J'^N, niri'i vers. 1, 2, 5, 
 6, 7, 8), in chap. iii. God is spoken of in vers. 1- 
 16, only indefinitely in the third person, in ver. 
 17 He is first addressed in the second person, and 
 in ver. 18 He is at last distinctly mentioned by 
 name (HiiT). This is evidently a designed climax. 
 I do not think with Engelhardt (p. 85), that a 
 tender conscience prevented the Poet from indi- 
 cating the Lord, explicitly by name, as the author 
 of his profound mental agitation; for what he 
 did in chapter second, and repeats in ver. 18 of 
 this chaptei', he could have done in vers. 1-16. 
 But this making the name of God prominent in 
 the last verse, at the culmination point of the 
 description of his sufferings, is due to the art of 
 the Poet, of which this Song affords striking evi- 
 dence. 
 
 PRELIMINARY NOTE. 
 
 The following general remarks on this section 
 are to be observed. 1. It contains a description 
 of the personal sorrows of one prominent man. 
 This man was distinguished by his position as 
 well as by his sufferings. The former is evident 
 from ver. 14, where it is said he had become a 
 derision to all the people; this could only happen 
 to one who stood out conspicuously before the 
 eyes of all the people. The second appears from 
 the fact, that he is described as one burdened with 
 sorrows more than all other persons (vers. 1-3). 
 2. We must recognize in the man thus made con- 
 spicuous the prophet Jeremiah. For not only the 
 description beginning at ver. 52, undoubtedly re- 
 fers to what befell this prophet as related in Jer. 
 xxxviii., but also, before that passage occurs, ver. 
 14 plainly indicates this prophet (see the exposi- 
 tion). There is then no doubt that this Song is 
 put into the mouth of the prophet Jeremiah. 3. 
 As in chapter second, in the first nine verses, the 
 
 III. 1-3. 
 
 1, 2 I am the man that hath seen affliction by the rod of His wrath. He hath led 
 3 me and brought me into darkness, but not into light. Surely against me is he turned ; 
 he turneth his hand against me all the day. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL.. 
 
 Ver. 1.— '^;3J not infrequent in Jer., xvii. 5, 7 ; xxii. 30 ; xxiii. 9, etc. In Lamentations in this chapter only, and here 
 
 four times, vers. 1, 27, 35, 39.— Jeremiah never uses 'JX, see i. 13. The choice of the word here seems due to similarity of 
 
 ■ t: 
 sound with '' JX, comp. Ps. Ixxxviii. 16.— £33^ in Jeremiah only in the two critically suspected places, x. 16 ; xv. 19, where 
 
 iri/nj t22\^ is found. This exact phrase ijllj V 122^ is found (as has not been before remarked, that I know of) in 
 
 T-:| ..v. T ; V v 
 
 Prov. xxii. 8, in that part of the Proverbs, too, which is acknowledged to be the oldest and which extends from x. 1 to xxii. 
 16. The expression there is used in the sense of being blamed by men ; here, the suffix refers to it God. — TT\2y, see ii. 2. 
 
 Ver. 2.— jn J not in Jeremiah in any form.— Hiph. tSiH Jeremiah often uses, ii. 16, 17 ; xxxi. 9 ; xxxii. 5.— The sub- 
 etantive "ijiyn never in Jeremiah. He seldom expresses this general thought, and when he does, he uses other words ; 
 ^\if2, S2"ij^, nio'7y. xiii.16,17; ii.6, dSbX; xxiii. 12, H'SaXD ; ii. 31. [If he preferred here a word he never used before, 
 euphony alone would suggest it to liim. It happens, however, that of the five words in his prophecies above cited, /our of 
 them he uses only once, and the fifth, riloS^, only twice; and one of the five, H'SSNO, is not found elsewhere in the 
 Bible. Where such variety of terms are used to express the same idea, the introduction of another new one may be deemed 
 as characteristic of the author. At least this word '!]fyn, aflfords no evidence against Jeremiah's authorship of Lamentar 
 tions.— W. H. H.]— X~)1, see ii. 1, 2, 14, 17 ; iii. 7, 49; iv. 6.— With respect to the Ace. loci, see ii. 21. 
 
 Ver. 3.— IT ';]£3n''_3ty'- In regard to the peculiar idiom by which an adverbial idea is expressed by a finite verb, 
 Bee my Or., g 95, ff. n. [Also Greek's Gr., I 269]. In Jer. xviii. 4, JK? occurs in a similar construction [see marginal read- 
 ing in E. v.] 
 
 I in this chapter are too evident to be disputed. 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. '^.^'^^ ^^^^^ v/ovAs, were the words of Jeremiah 
 
 himself must be the opinion of all who read thi« 
 
 Ver. 1. I am the man. — [The references to chapter unprejudiced by a theory to the contrary 
 
 the personal experiences of the prophet Jeremiah (see Introduction). Cut we are not to regard 
 
104 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 him as speaking here as a private person. He 
 speaks as the Prophet of Jehovah raised up at 
 that particular juncture, to stand between the peo- 
 ple and their covenant God, to reveal His will to 
 them and to present their interest to God at the 
 throne of grace, for these were the twofold func- 
 tions of the prophet's office. The Prophet there- 
 fore was a representative man. He stood for the 
 people. He suffered for the people. He spoke for 
 the people. Hence in this Song Jeremiah easily 
 passes from the singular to the plural forms of 
 3peech, from /and me, to ive and us. [Gerlach: 
 "The supposition thatinthis chapter the personal 
 sufferings of the Prophet are the subject of his 
 Lamentation (Michaelis, Pareau, Maurer, Kal- 
 KAR, Bleek in his Introduction), cannot be cer- 
 tainly proved, either from ver. 14 (see Coram, on 
 that ver.), nor from the description contained in 
 53-55, where the possihilily of a figurative sense 
 cannot be denied. In opposition to this opinion are 
 the following arguments. 1. From the fact that we 
 imperceptibly takes the place of /in ver. 22 and 
 vers. 40-47, we may conclude that in the rest of 
 the chapter also, the prophet does not speak only 
 in his own name and of his own person. 2. Un- 
 less we would destroy the whole connection of 
 the chapter, we must allow that the calamity, 
 recognized in vers. 42, 43, as the punishment of 
 the sins of the people {we have sinned), is the 
 same calamity which is described in vers. 1-18 
 with reference to the experience of a single in- 
 dividual — an opinion, which, by manifold agree- 
 ments between the two sections, is shown to be 
 correct. 3. The lamentation of the Prophet 
 over his own past suffering, in the actual pre- 
 sence of a great national calamity, would be no 
 less improbable, than the position of this chap- 
 ter, in the middle of four others lamenting the 
 national calamity, would in that case be inappro- 
 priate. The Lamentation of this chapter is then 
 correctly understood only, when it is regarded as 
 a lamentation of every one of the individual 
 pious Israelites, as a lamentation which, while 
 proceeding from self-experienced mental suffer- 
 ings, has its truth, neverthelesss, for all pious 
 Israelites, in whose name the Prophet speaks. 
 This was perceived by Aben Ezra, when he 
 designated the individual Israelites as the sub- 
 ject lamenting, and in this most modern inter- 
 preters (ROSENMUELLER, EwALD, ThENIUS, NEU- 
 MANN, Vaihinger) agree." — W. H. H.] — That 
 hath seen affliction — who saw misery, i. e., ex- 
 perienced it. Raschi is of the opinion that the 
 verb here expresses the idea of liviny to see the 
 fulfilment of the destruction predicted, which 
 would suit Jeremiah alone. But in that case it 
 would at least have been necessary to say C^i^n) 
 
 the aflSiction, or misery. The verb may have the 
 sense, in a general way, of experiencing or liv- 
 ing to see, as frequently (see Jer. v. 12 ; Ps. xvi. 
 10; xlix. 10; Eccl. viii. 16; ix. 9). But the 
 distinction between prophecy and fulfilment is 
 too feebly indicated, to admit of Raschi's inter- 
 pretation. The Poet has rather in view the dis- 
 tinction between higher and comparatively in- 
 ferior degrees of suffering. He would simply 
 say that he had suffered more than all other per- 
 •ons. Besides, 7nan ("^3^) would be too indefinite. 
 
 We would expect seer (Jlii'^), or prophet (X'3J); 
 [I am the prophet, or seer, who has lived to see 
 the fulfilment of my own predictions.] — By the 
 rod of his wrath. — The expression can only 
 mean, that the Poet had seen misery in conse- 
 quence of God's using the rod of His wrath. 
 Compare Is. x. 5, where the Lord calls the As- 
 syrian the rod of My anger, and Job ix. 34 ; xxi. 
 9, where the rod of God is spoken of in a general 
 way. [Calvin: "At the very beginning he ac- 
 knowledges that whatever he suffered had been 
 inflicted by God's hand . . . there is included in 
 the word wrath a brief confession, especially 
 when it is added by the rod, or staff."] 
 
 Ver. 2. He hath led me and brought me — 
 He led and brought me — into darkness but (or, 
 and) not into light. — The metaphor, [of light 
 and darkness for prosperity and adversity] is 
 found in Am. v. 18, 20 ; Job xii. 25, expressed 
 in the same Hebrew phrase. 
 
 Ver. 3. Surely against me. — The threefold 
 prominence given to the person speaking, by the 
 repetition of the personal pronoun three times in 
 the beginning of the Song, is not without a rea- 
 son. These introductory verses thus acquire a 
 thematic character, i. e., it is thus indicated that 
 the speaker intends to make his own person es- 
 pecially a the/)ie of discourse. His justification 
 in this is, that he can with good reason assume 
 to himself the personality punished to the greatest 
 degree by sufferings of every sort. While he was 
 this, he was also at the same time a leader, as it 
 were, of all punished in the same way, therefore 
 the representative of a whole class of sufferers, 
 — of the Israel, hated by men but beloved of God, 
 of the 'lapar/A Kara nvsv/ia — the spiritual Israel. 
 This explanation would not stand, if we were to 
 understand the whole people as indicated by the 
 man in ver. 1. That the whole people are not so 
 designated by the man, will be seen further on. 
 For the present, the expression itself, the man, 
 furnishes an argument against it: for through- 
 out the book Zion is always spoken of as a fe- 
 male. See his strongholds, ii. 5, where only the 
 masculine pronoun is used in reference to Zion, 
 and there only because the words are a quotation. 
 [Probably the pronoun there refers to God, not 
 to Zion. See the Notes.— W. H. H.]— Is he 
 turned ; he turneth his hand against me 
 all the day, — turned he his hand always again the 
 whole day. \_IIe turns Ilis hand again and again the 
 whole day long. The Hebrew is very idiomatic. 
 The true construction is explained by the gram- 
 matical note of Naegelsbach above, referring to 
 the use of a verb in an adverbial sense. The 
 best grammarians and Versions agree in this con- 
 st ruction. Our English Version is obviously 
 wrong, not only because it translates both verbs 
 transitively, but because it translates them in dif- 
 ferent tenses and is obliged to supply the words 
 against me in the last clause. The verbs are both 
 future and ought to be taken in the sense of the 
 historical imperfect, because the Prophet would 
 express the constant repetition of God's strokes, 
 or else as a present tense, because the prophet is 
 referring to sufferings not yet at an end. — W. 
 H. H.] AU the day.— See i. 13; iii. 14,62. 
 [He smote me and continues smiting me again and 
 again, all the day long. — W. H. H.] 
 
CHAP. III. 4-9. IOj 
 
 III. 4-9. 
 
 4, 5 My flesh and my skin hath he made old : he hath broken my bones. He hath 
 
 6 builded against me, and compassed me with gall and travail. He hath set me in 
 
 7 dark places, as they that be dead of old. He hath hedged me about, that I cannot 
 
 8 get out : he hath made my chain heavy. Also, when I cry and shout, he shutteth 
 
 9 out my prayer He hath inclosed my ways with hewn stone : he hath made my 
 paths crooked. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 4. — Jeremiah uaes "It^J often, vii. 21 ; xii. 12, etc. ; "11_y, once, xiii. 23. The two words occur in cOanectiop, es- 
 pecially in Leviticus, xiii. 2-4 ; xi. 38, 39. Comp. besides .Tob xix. 20, Prov. v. 11 ; Lam. iv. 8 ; v. 10. 
 
 Ver. 5. — np''1 involves, like 31tJ'\ ver. 3, au adverbial relation to the principal verb, see ver. 3. [There is no necessity 
 for this construction here, nor are the verbs so nearly synonymous as to render this construction likely. It is better to 
 take the two verbs as having the same relation to ' /J/, and the same subjective accusative in HN /HI E'XT- — ^ 7j/ nj3- 
 
 T- tt; -ttt 
 
 Gesenius : " God hath huilded against me, obstructed me, shut up my way on every side so that I cannot get out." — W. H. H.] 
 — TP*^' <''sswhere frequently in the sense circuve, circumdare (see Jos. vi. 3 ; Ps. xvii. 9 ; xlviii. 13, etc.), means also cir- 
 
 cumponere, and that which is placed around in the accusative by itself. So also Joli xix. 6. The word is lot found in Jere- 
 miah. — ^H'\ (in Jeremiah only in the connection IJ/XT 'D, viii. 14 ; ix. 14; xxiii. 15) is of uncertain derivation, but in- 
 dicates undoubtedly /jotson (see Deut. xxix. 17 ; xxxii. 32, 33; Lam. ill. 19). The word connected with it, HX 'r*, does not 
 occur in Jeremiah, although he used the verb HX/, comparatively speaking, frequently, vi. 11 ; ix. 4 ; xii. .J ; xv. 6;xx. 
 
 T T 
 
 9. The meaning is difficulty, labor, Ex. xviii. 8 ; Num. xx. 14 ; Neh. ix. 32 ; Mai. i. 13. 
 
 Ver. 6. — D'^E'nO, not in Jeremiah. — 3'iyin, Jer. xxxii. 37. [This word does not imply the posters of sitting, as Hen- 
 derson imagines, when he says the language may refer " to an ancient custom of placing the dead bodies in a sitting pos- 
 ture in the sepulchres." — W. H. H.] , 
 
 Ver. 7. — nj, Jeremiah never uses. [Observe, this is an initial word. See Intr., Add. Rem. (6), p. 31. — W. II. II.] — X/l 
 
 X]^ X is found in Ps. Ixxxviii. 9, word for word. For the construction [of 1 with the future, that 1 could not gofortii] see my 
 
 ffr., g 89, 3 6, 2; 1 109, 3.— lODH is, to say the least, foreign to Jeremiah's style. Comp. 1 Kings xii. 10, 14.— flt^nj, in 
 
 the sense of a fetter, only here ; elsewhere DT^tJ'n J, Jer. xxxix. 7 ; lii. 11, etc. 
 
 Ver. 8. — pj?i, in the sense of crying to God, frequently with Jeremiah, for example xi. 11, 12 ; xx. 8 ; xxv. 34. — Tha 
 
 verb ^'Iti* (see Ps. Ixxxviii. 14) used only in Piel, does not occur in Jeremiah; he uses only the substantive derived from it 
 
 n^lti', which also occurs in our chapter, ver. 56. — The verb Ont!', thus written, occurs only here. It is merely a scribal 
 
 variety of DPD ; see I^E^ ii. 6. Jeremiah uses neither. The sense is obstruere (of wells. Gen. xxvi. 15, 18 ; 2 Kings iii. 19, 
 
 25), occludere, recludere (of prophetical mysteries, Dan. viii. 26 ; iv. 9). [Mich.^elis, Rosenmueller, Geklach : Ohstruxit pre- 
 cibus ma's xHam qua perivnire ad suas aures j)o.ssint.] 
 
 Ver. 9. — jTHi not in Jeremiah. May tliere not be an allusion to stones with which the grave is built up? — rii^'DJ 
 
 •T • ; 
 
 inJer. vi. 16; xviii. 15. — Piel niV occurs only in Is. xxiv. 1. Jeremiah uses Hiph. twice, D3"^T ^llTt; iii. 21, Pliyn 
 
 1 . T ■ T : - -."Iv ■■-:\- 
 
 ^X /J, ix. 4. That T\^^ T\13'nj indicates the destruction of the via munita, as Thenius would have it, I do not believe. 
 
 For in Is xxiv. 1, H'^ signifies not e?'er<ere, but perrertere. [Gerlach: " rUTlJ is not a carefully constructed causeway 
 
 T • I T • : 
 
 (Thenius), which is rather the meaning of TlvDO, but is rather the path worn by the steps of the traveller, then any small 
 
 by-road (see Jer. xviii. 15, where PI /17D N/ ^"IT is added epexegetically to ni3T\J)-"] 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 It may be observed here that the speaker, 
 having in the introductory verses 1-3 designated 
 himself, in general terms, as the man most 
 severely punished, now proceeds to prove this in 
 detail. 
 
 Ver. 4. He begins with direct personal suffer- 
 ings in his flesli, skin and bones. My flesh 
 and my skin hath he made old. — He wasted 
 aivay viy fie.sh tnidvu/ skin. The verb rendered he 
 made old, in the Kal, has an intransitive significa- 
 tion, atteri, consumi, to be wasted away by attri- 
 tion, to be consumed, especially of garments 
 (Deut. viii. 4; xxix. 5 ; comp. Is. 1. 9 ; li. 6) and 
 of the bodily faculties (Gen. xviii. 12) : in the 
 Piel, which is used here, it means atterere, to wear 
 out by attrition [the verb means tore<6], constimerc. 
 
 to consume, waste away ; it is found in this sense, 
 besides here, in Ps. xlix. 15; Job xxi. 13; Is. 
 Ixv. 22; 1 Chron. xvii. 19. — He hath broken 
 my bones. He broke (see ii. 9) my bones [Hen- 
 derson : Broke in pieces^. The same phrase oc- 
 curs in Is. xxxviii. 13. See Ps. li. 10 ; Job xxx. 
 17, and the declaration of the contrary in Ps. 
 xxxiv. 21. [The breaking of the bones indicate, 
 not only the loss of physical strength, but a con- 
 dition of great suffering. "The hones are often 
 represented in the Scriptures as the seat of acute 
 pain" (Barnes.) Job xx". 11; xxx. 17»; Ps. vi. 
 2; xxii. 14; xxxi. 10; xxxviii. 3; xlii. 10; Prov. 
 xiv. 30. We can only take the phrase here in 
 the metaphorical sense. He was suffering both 
 physical weakness and physical pain. — W. H. H.] 
 Ver. 5. Now follow the hindrances which have 
 been raised against him from without. And first 
 he says, he had been built around with poison 
 
lOG 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 ami trouble. — He hath builded against me 
 and compassed me with gall and travail. 
 
 He built up against me and round about me poison 
 and difficult!/. \_He built around me, and encovi- 
 passed \_me'\ with bitterness and distress. — VV. H. H.j 
 The image of a beleaguered city lies at the foun- 
 dation of the thought here. But we are not, 
 with the older commentators, to supply wall 
 CnjfD), or some similar word after the verb built, 
 
 T 
 
 but rather are to take gall and travail [poison and 
 difficulty] as the object of that verb. The connec- 
 tion of words and thoughts here is singular, and 
 has not up to the present time been sufficiently 
 elucidated. Perhaps the Poet would say that 
 the Lord had surrounded him, not only with hard- 
 ehips of every sort, but wiiii adversities in them- 
 selves ruinous, it is however possible that in the 
 word poison, Wii"), the idea of bitterness (see Ps. 
 Ixix. 22) may predominate. Any way a sudden 
 transition, from a figurative to a literal style of 
 speaking, is effected. [There is perhaps no more 
 difficulty here than is created by an attempt to 
 reduce a metaphorical expression to the terms 
 of a literal and actual fact. To enclose and en- 
 compass one with bitterness and trouble or dis- 
 tress (using the abstract for the concrete, i. e., 
 with circumstances causing bitterness and dis- 
 tress), as if these were obstructing walls, is un- 
 doubtedly the sense of our text, and is adopted 
 by most of the versions and commentators. — W. 
 H. H.] 
 
 [The Sept., the Takg. and the Arab, (not the 
 VuLG. as Blaynet says), render K'XI, as if it 
 were ^E'Sil, 7ny head. But these and all the 
 ancient versions translate the same word in ver. 
 19, by gall. The Sept. also translates TMiir} as 
 a verb, kfi6x'&T]aev. Blayney adopts these read- 
 ings of the Sept., but instead of elucidating the 
 meaning, confuses it still more by a new transla- 
 tion of the first clause : " He hath built upon me, 
 and encompassed my head, so that it is weary." 
 Henderson adopts partially the Sept. transla- 
 tion, but discovers a new and doubtful meaning 
 for the second verb, TPI^t H^ hath builded against 
 me and struck me on the head, and it is distressed. 
 Fuebst proposes (See his Lex. under the word 
 
 nxSn) to carry out the military idea suggested 
 by the verbs, thus ; He ha.s surrounded me with 
 fortifications and a trench. But it is hardly neces- 
 sary to accept the new and unauthorized deriva- 
 tions of these words, when their frequent use 
 gives us a sense, that is, indeed, metaphorical, 
 but none the less clear and expressive, and sus- 
 tained so generally by the Versions, old and new. 
 — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 6. To the obstructions of the way are 
 added the obstructions of light. This whole verse 
 is reproduced word for word in Ps. cxliii. 3. — He 
 hath set me in dark places. He caused me to 
 dwell in darkness. — As they that be dead of 
 old. — As the dead of olden time. Ps. Ixxxviii. 5-7 
 and 11-13, afford the best commentary on this. 
 There are those dead before the appointed time, 
 whom the Lord remembers no more, and to whom 
 He shows no more the wonders of His grace. 
 The expression is found only here and in Ps. 
 cxliii. 3. LWe may translate it either the dead of 
 
 old, or the forever dead. Blayney: "God had in- 
 volved him in such a depth of distress, that he 
 was as incapable of extricating himself, as those 
 who had laid long in the dark mansions of the 
 dead were of making their escape thence." Ger- 
 lach; "He is thrust into the darkness of the 
 grave (Ps. Ixxxviii. 5, 6), or of Sheol (Ps. 
 Ixxxviii. 7; Job x. 21, 22) — as an image of dis- 
 tress, Ps. XXX. 1; Ixxxviii. — like the dead of eter- 
 nity, the forever dead (Vulg., mortui sempiterni). — ■ 
 Most commentators (Michaelis, Rosenmueller, 
 Maurer, De Wette, Ewald, Thenius, Neu- 
 mann, Bottcher) explain, the dead o/oW=those 
 a long time dead; but whether dead a long or a 
 short time makes no difference, and this, asCoNZ 
 has correctly remarked, 'would occasion an ab- 
 surd ambiguity, as if the dead, who have been 
 but a little while dead and buried, might not lie 
 in darkness.' The Chal. : Mortui qui vadunt in 
 alterum seculum (mundum).^' — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 7. A climax! Not only has the Lord 
 surrounded him with obstacles and deprived him 
 of light, but He has also taken away his freedom. 
 He is imprisoned and fettered ! He hath 
 hedged me about, that I cannot get out. 
 He hedged me in that I could not get out [or, that 1 
 should not escape, or go forth. — The very words of 
 Christ in the passion psalm, Ixxxviii. 9 (Words- 
 worth) ]. He hath made my chain heavy, 
 — He made heavy my chain, or fetter. 
 
 Ver. 8. The Lord accepts none of the sufferer's 
 prayers. He hears him not. [Henderson : 
 " The prophet places himself in the position of a 
 prisoner, who is securely immured, and to whose 
 supplications for deliverance, how earnestly 
 soever they may be made, no attention is paid."] 
 Also when I cry and shout, he shutteth out 
 my prayer. Also though I cry and call for help, 
 my prayer has he barred or bolted. [The idea is, 
 hindered or obstructed. He has taken means, by 
 anticipation, to prevent my prayer for help from 
 being heard, either by Himself, or by any other 
 who might possibly come to the rescue. The 
 change from the future tenses, to the preterite 
 tense, seems to indicate this meaning. — W. H. H.] 
 Tne sense cannot be that the Lord prevented the 
 prayer from going out of the man's heart, for 
 in fact he cried (see Rosenmueller in loc), but 
 that He shut up the way of access to His owa 
 ear and heart. Comp. ver. 44; Prov. i. 28. 
 [Wordsworth : " So the suffering Messiah says, 
 Ps. xxii. 2, "0 my God, I cry in the daytime, 
 but Thou hearest not." Gerlach: "However 
 loudly he prays, the Lord has closed His ear; 
 ver. 44; Job xix. 8; Is. i. 15; Jer. vii. 16; Ps. 
 xviii. 42; Prov. i. 28."] 
 
 Ver. 9. The right way is built up against the 
 Poet, so that he seems compelled to false ways. — 
 He hath inclosed — lie hedged in [same word 
 as in ver. 7] — my w^ays vrith hewn stones. 
 If hewn, then large stones, for we do not build 
 with small ones. Comp. Ex. xx. 25 ; 1 Kings v. 
 81; Is. ix. 9; Am. v. 11; Ezck. xL 42.— He 
 hath made — he made — my paths crooked. 
 The Poet would say that he had been forced to 
 crooked and false paths. See crooked ways, Ps. 
 cxxv. 5; crooked things. Is. xlii. 1(3. [At the first 
 glance this would seem to be a continuation of 
 the figure contained inverses 7, 8. This impres- 
 sion is due to the repetition of the word 1^J, hedged 
 
CHAP. III. 10-18. 
 
 107 
 
 in, and to the climax implied by hewn stone. The 
 idea, in that case, is, that having imprisoned him 
 and loaded him with fetters and shut out his cry 
 for help, God proceeds, as it were, to make his 
 imprisonment permanent and secure, by building 
 up around him a wall of hewn stone. If this is 
 so, then the last clause cannot mean Be made my 
 paths crooked, for one in the situation described 
 must remain an inactive, passive sufferer; but it 
 would mean that God had made all paths of es- 
 cape impassable. The principal avenues of escape 
 ('D"^T) are built up with hewn stones, barriers 
 that cannot be scaled. The smaller paths VI\\yr\l) 
 are brolien up, turned upside down, and thus 
 rendered impassable. This is Gerlach's view. 
 It is better, however, to regard this verse as in- 
 troducing a new metaphor, which is continued 
 in ver. 10. "He next conceives of himself as a 
 traveller whose way is blocked up by a solid wall, 
 and who, being compelled to turn aside into the 
 devious pathways of the forest, is exposed to the 
 rapacity of wild beasts" (Henderson). This 
 view is recommended by the following considera- 
 tions. 1. The figure of an immured and fettered 
 prisoner is already complete, and could receive 
 no additional force from what is here said. 2. 
 The repetition of the verb l^il, hedged in, which 
 in ordinary cases would indicate a continuance 
 
 of the same subject, is accounted for here by tht 
 necessity of a word with the same initial letter. 
 
 3. The expressions "wyways" and ''my paths." 
 favor this construction. They are his, because 
 he is expected to pursue them. Were they sim- 
 ply the ways and paths of possible escape from 
 the place of confinement, they would not, stricily 
 speaking, be hisa,t all, for he could not use them. 
 
 4. This explanation makes the next verse h-ss 
 abrupt, and produces a regular and beaut ilul 
 succession of metaphorical pictures. 5. Tbe iclru 
 of simply breaking up or turning over the ////- 
 paths, as expressed by the Hebrew verb nj>, 
 does not correspond with the security against 
 escape expressed by building up the main ave- 
 nues of escape with hewn stone. 6. The common 
 translation. He made iny palJi crooked, best agrees 
 with the force of the Hebrew verb, and is adopted 
 with great unanimity by the Versions and com- 
 mentators. Owen: "The m<2&n\ng\s turned aside. 
 He had built, as it were, a wall of hewn stones 
 across his way, and thus He turned aside liis go- 
 ings or his paths, so that he was constrained to 
 take some other course." Wordsworth: "Not 
 only hath He blocked up my way with hewn 
 stones, but He has turned my paths aside from 
 their proper direction." So E. V., Broughton, 
 Calvin, Blatney, Bootheoyd, Henderson, and 
 NoYES.— W. H. H.] 
 
 III. 10-18. 
 
 10, 11 He was unto me as a bear lying in wait, and as a lion in secret places. He 
 
 12 hath turned aside my ways, and pulled me in pieces : he hath made me desolato. He 
 
 13 hath bent his bow, and set me as a mark for the arrow. He hath caused the arrows 
 
 14 of his quiver to enter into my reins. I was a derision to all my people, and their 
 
 15 song all the day. He hath filled me with bitterness, he hath made me drunken 
 
 16 with wormwood. He hath also broken my teeth with gravel-stones, he hath covered 
 
 17 me with ashes. And thou hast removed my soul far off from peace: I fbrgat pros- 
 
 18 perity. And I said, My strength and my hope is perished from the Lord. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 10. — Jeremiah never mentions bears. [Tlie need of an initial T would naturally suggest the bear in connection with 
 the lion. See Intr., Add. Rem. (0), p. 31.— W. H. H.]— Jeremiah uses 31X only once, in the phrase D'^IJ^D ^U'DPI, 'i. 12,— 
 
 ~ T ' : T . T 
 
 C^nOiD Jeremiah uses often, xiii. 17 ; xxiii. 24; xli.x. 10. 
 • T ; • 
 Ver. 11. — nt^i3, "'f- Aeyd^x. In the Aramaic it stands for HP J in frustra dissecuit (Lev. i. G, 12), for tIDtO dilaniavit 
 
 (Job XVI. 9), for nD!2? dissecuit, p"l£3 /regit (1 Sam. xv. 33 ; Ps. vii. 3). See Cur. B. Mich.^elis in Rosenmueller and Ges. 
 Thes., p. 1153. — For relation of 0012' to Jeremiah's style and use of language, see i. 4. U^f^ Jeremieih uses not infre- 
 quently, xii. 11 ; xiii. 16; xvii. 5, etc. [D31ty would be suggested here as alliterative with preceding word.— W. II. H.] 
 
 Ver. 12. — 3'Vn in Jer. v. 26; xxxi. 21 — rT^QD, in the sense of custodia, a place of custody, frequently in Jeremiah, 
 
 T T - 
 
 xxxii. 2, 12, etc. In the sense of a mark, only here. Job xvi. 12, and 1 Sam. xx. 20. See Gesen. Tfies., p. 511 «. v., Vfl- 
 With regard to its Aramaic termination X— (see XJE?', iv. 1). See Olsh., g 38 /., 108 e [Green's Gr., g 196 d]. This is no 
 evidence against Jeremiac authorship, since, not only analogies occur in Jeremiah (see H^"], 1. 11 ; XiJ'J, xxiii. 39), but 
 
 TT T 
 
 scattered examples occur also in older books. See Olsh. as above.— vpi, Jer. ix. 7 ; 1. 9, 14, etc. 
 
 Ver. 13.— Hiph. XOH often in Jeremiali, iii. 14 ; xx. 5 ; xxv. 9, 13, ete.— Jeremiah also uses HiJK^X (v. 15), but ' J3 
 n3K/X occurs only here. The arrow is called r\^p-'l2 in Job xli. 20. See ntyi-"J3, sons of flame, of lightning, by which 
 many interpreters understand arrows, others sparks, and others birds. See also IDi" 'JS, Zech. iv. 14; tOt!'-?3, Is. v. 1. 
 
 Ver. 14.— The words phi:? T\''''n are taken from Jer. xx. 7, where it is said, ''S Jji'? »1rf3 DITI-Sd plllK'S Tl"?! 
 
 —nj'JJ Jeremiah never uses. See Lam. iii. 63 ; v. 14. 
 T . : 
 
108 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 Ver. 15. — Jeremiah uses Hiph. j^'Stj^n, v. 7. — 3'''^1'^r3, besides here only in Ex. xii. 8; Num. ix. 11. — Hiph. 711171 
 
 Ter. xxxi. 25. — HJV 7, wormwood, absintfiium, Jeremiah uses in ix. 14; xxiii. 15. 
 T-:|- 
 Ver. 16. — The verb 0'^i, contundere, comminuere, is found besides here only in Ps. cxix. 20. — The verb \^22 occurs only 
 - T . - T . 
 
 here. It is in Hiph., and means ohruit, cooperuit. [All the ancient Versions seem to have considered Uf33 same as iy33- 
 
 ~ T "- T 
 
 The Sept., ei^u/nitreV fie a-rroSov, is rendered by Vulg. cibavit me cinere, " as if from lj/33 came the Latin word dims " 
 
 - T 
 
 (Blatjtey) ; but this meaning cannot be extracted from the fundamental sense of the root (see Fderst). The Targ. rendered 
 it laid low, which gives good sense, and is adopted by Blatnet, Boothroyd. Owen and C. B. Michaelts. The Arabic, rolled 
 me in the ashes, which is adopted by Luther, E. V. marg., J. D. Michaelis and Ewald. The Syr, besprinkled, or covered, 
 
 which is generally accepted as the correct meaning.— W. H. H.]— "liJN in Jeremiah only in the kindred expression 'C?73nn 
 
 "13X3, vi. 26 ; Comp. Ezek. xxvii. 30. 
 
 Ver. 17.— nJT Jeremiah never uses: see ii. 7.— PIK^J, Jer. xxiii. 39.— TIDID frequently in Jeremiah, xiv. 11 ; xviii. 10, 
 
 -T T T T 
 
 20, etc. 
 
 Ver. 18.— "lOiJV See ver. 54; Jer. iii. 17, 19 — fl^J. Only n]f J occurs in Jeremiah, and that with reference to time, 
 
 duration. — ^1*77110) Jeremiah never uses : but see Prov. xi. 7 ; Ezek. xix. 5; xxxvii. 11. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 10. While in what precedes we were told 
 how the sufferer was deprived of all means of 
 escape, what follows describes the positive 
 weapons of offence with which he was assaulted. 
 [By regarding ver. 9 as in close connection with 
 what precedes, the introduction of the bear and 
 lion in ver. 10 is abrupt and irrelevant. A 
 prisoner, closely immured, has nothing to fear 
 from bears and lions lurking in their coverts. 
 Connect ver. 9 with ver. 10, however, and the 
 sense is apparent. A traveller, prevented by 
 barricades and stone walls from pursuing the 
 way he would go, is compelled to follow crooked 
 paths environed with danger of encountering 
 lurking wild beasts. See notes on ver. 9 — W. 
 H. II.] — He -was unto me as a bear lying in 
 wait, and as a lion in secret places. A 
 lurking bear tvas he to me, — a lion in ambuxh. The 
 image of a bear lying in wait occurs only here. 
 See, however, Hos. xiii. 7, 8; Am. v. 19; Prov. 
 xxviii. 15. The figure of a lion lying in wait 
 occurs in Jeremiah xlix. 19; 1. 14; comp. ii. 30; 
 iv. 7; V. 6; xii. 8. Elsewhere, see Ps. x. 9; 
 xvii. 12. 
 
 Ver. 11. Bears or lions, when they attack a 
 flock, spring upon them, tear the sheep in pieces 
 and leave those they do not eat weltering alone 
 in their blood. This last has happened to the 
 Poet. He hath turned aside my •ways — he 
 drove me aside. He hath made mi/ wai/.s turn aside 
 [lit.], that is to say, He drives me from the right, 
 direct way. And pulled me in pieces, he 
 hath made me desolate. He tore me in pieces 
 and cast me away lonely and miserable. Should we 
 translate, He tore me to pieces, mutilated me, and 
 understand this to mean that the wild beast had 
 eaten his victim, then this would not suit the 
 other figures used in the text. On this account, 
 we must understand this tearing in pieces only in 
 the sense of discerpere, of mangling, lacerating. 
 So EwALD, mich zerrupfend. The Poet would say 
 that the beast of prey had seized one of the 
 scattered flock, had throttled it and left it for 
 dead, lying alone in its misery. For we must 
 carefully observe the two ideas expressed here 
 in the last Hebrew word, DOIB?, that of desolation, 
 destruction (see i. 4, 1.3, 16), and that of solitari- 
 ness, loncline.'is (Is. liv. 1 ; 2 Sam. xiii. 20). [This 
 word. Doits', may express any object of suffering 
 
 forsaken of God and men, exciting, therefore, 
 either pity or astonishment. See the use of the 
 verb and its derivatives in ch. i. ; Is. liv. 1 ; Job 
 xvi. 7; xxi. 5; Ps. cxliii. 4. The fundamental 
 signification of the root is to be motionless, filled 
 with dread. This is the idea here. A solitary 
 sheep, torn by the wild beast, lying alone in its 
 suffering, and apparently dead. He made me 
 desolate, or a desolation, may be a literal transla- 
 tion, but does not convey the sense which can 
 only be done by inventing a phrase, as Naegels- 
 BACH has done. The idea is best condensed, per- 
 haps, in the words, He left me suffering and aloie. 
 — W. H. H.] 
 
 "I^ID cannot be taken here in the sense it al- 
 ways has elsewhere, refractarius, rebdlis. The 
 word in this sense is Part. Kal. of T^D, and oc- 
 
 ~ T 
 
 curs only in Hos. iv. 16. Here it can only be, 
 either Pilel of 10 [so Davidson], or Poel of "l^D 
 (Olsh. § 2o4). It is, in either case, a verbal 
 form, occurring no where except here, and mean- 
 ing He made my ways turn aside, that is to say, 
 he drove me from the right, direct way. Thenius 
 lays too much stress on the word, when he trans- 
 lates, He has dragged me aside. [The idea is, He 
 causes me to diverge from the way, to escape the 
 lurking beast ; but in vain, for he springs upon 
 me, rends me, and leaves me weltering in blood. 
 Blatney gives us an original translation of his 
 own. "i/e hath turned full upon me. T^D is ap- 
 plied, Hos. iv. 16, to a refractory heifer, that 
 turns aside, and will not go forward in the 
 straiglit track, as she is directed. Here it is to 
 be understood of a bear or lion turning aside to- 
 ward a traveller, to fall upon him in his way." 
 Gerlach understands the word here to signify 
 turning back, instead of turning aside, that is, 
 arresting the fugitive and sending him back to 
 prison. But neither the context, nor the signifi- 
 cation of the word allow of this sense. J.\rcui, 
 according to Gerlach, regarded 'l^iD, as a de- 
 nominative from T'ip, spinis opplcvit vias meas. So 
 Hugh Brouohton, My ways hath He made thorny. 
 — W. H. II.] 
 
 Ver. 12. In a new figure the Poet describes the 
 Lord as an archer, who has made him his mark. 
 [Henderson : "The idea of a hunter was na- 
 turally suggested by the circumstances just re- 
 ferred to. This is beautitully expressed iu lan- 
 giiatre borrowed from such employment."] He 
 hath bent — He bent — his bovy. — See. ii. 4 
 
CHAP. III. 10-18. 
 
 103 
 
 And set me as a — the — mark for the arrow^. 
 
 The second half of the verse seems to be an imita- 
 tion of Job xvi. 12. 
 
 Ver. 13. Continuation of the figure employed 
 in ver. 12. He hath caused the arrow^s of 
 his quiver to enter into my reins. — He shot 
 into my reins the sons of his quiver. The Lord not 
 only aims at the mark, He hits it, and that right 
 in the centre. The reins are here regarded as 
 the central organs, as frequently with Jeremiah 
 (xi. 20 ; xii. 2 ; xvii. 10; xx. 12), not in a physi- 
 cal sense, however, but in a psychological sense, 
 as appears from ver. 14. See Delitzsch Fsi/cho- 
 logie, § 13, p. 268, 2d Edition. — The expression 
 sons of the quiver, occurs only here. Rosen- 
 MUELLER quotes not inappropriately the pharetra 
 gravida sagitljs of Horace [Ode I. 22, 23). 
 
 Ver. 14. It happens here that the Poet sud 
 denly loses the figure. But it seems as if he 
 would indicate by means of ver. 14, that by the 
 arrows of which he spoke in ver. 13, he meant 
 the arrows of derision. Jeremiah ix. 7 explicitly 
 
 calls the deceitful tongue (no^D ptJ^7), a sharpened 
 arrow {\5r\W \r\) See Is.'xlix. 2.-1 was a 
 derision to all my people. — / have become a 
 laughing stock to all my people. Altogether un- 
 necessarily many interpreters (eveuTHEXius and 
 Ewald) take '5^, my people, as a rare plural 
 form for D'Oj^, peoples, nations (as, it is asserted, 
 in 2 Sam. xxii. 44; Ps. cxliv. 2. See Ewald, g 
 177 a). This rests on the presumption that tlje 
 subject of the Lamentation is not the Prophet, 
 but the people of Israel. We have already above, 
 at vers. 1-3, declared ourselves against this opin- 
 ion, and will return to the question again below, 
 at ver. 40 sqq. [Henderson; "Instead of 'DJ? 
 my people, a considerable number of MSS. read 
 D'Jp^, and four D'O^H in the plural; but this 
 reading, though supported by the Syr., seems less 
 suitable than the former. There is no evidence 
 that the Prophet was treated otherwise than with 
 respect by foreigners. Instead of meeting with 
 any consideration from his countrymen, fidelity 
 in the discharge of his duty to whom had been the 
 occasion of all his persoii.il troubles, he was made 
 the Imtt of their ridicu e, and the theme of their 
 satirie.il songs." See Jer. xx. 7.] And their 
 song all the day. [The conjunction and is not 
 in tlie original, and is omitted by Naegelsbach. 
 — W. H. H.] The expression, their song (DTlJ'jp), 
 is from Job xxx. 9 ; comp. xii. 4 ; Ps. Ixix. 8-13. 
 Ver. 15. After the short interruption of ver. 
 14, the Poet returns to the figurative style of 
 speaking. He exhausts, as it were, his stock of 
 images, in order to depict the adversities which 
 befell him. He must also receive them as meat 
 and drink, and that too in copious measure , 
 and he must be covered with them as with ashes. 
 [Scott: Vers. 14-16. "In the midst of his 
 other troubles, the prophet was derided and in- 
 sulted by the people, over whose approaching 
 calamities he so pathetically mourned; and they 
 made him the subject of their profane songs, for 
 whicli they were at length made a derision uiul a 
 song to their enemies. Thus the Lord filled him 
 with bitterness and intoxicated him with the 
 nauseous cup, of which he was made to drink, 
 instead of the cordials that his case seemed 
 
 to require: and instead of nourishing, palatable 
 food, his bread was as it were mixed with gravel, 
 which brake his teeth, and put him to great pain 
 when he attempted to eat: and he was covered 
 with ashes, as a constant mourner and penitent."] 
 — He hath filled me with bitterness (m.irg., 
 bitternesses). He satiated me icith bitterness. [The 
 Hebrew verb is used to denote satiety after eat- 
 ing, Dent. vi. 11; Hosea iv. 10. The connection 
 seems to require this sense here He was re- 
 quired to eat bitter things, or bitter herbs (see 
 Fuerst's Lex.), and drink ivormwood till he 
 was filled.— W. H. H.]— He hath made me 
 drunken with w^ormwood. — He made me 
 drunk with [or, made me drink to excess o/] worm 
 wood. See ver. 19. 
 
 Ver. 16. He hath also broken [lit. And he 
 broke. Vers. 16-18 each, begin with and (or vav 
 conversive) for the sakeof theiniiial letter, which 
 is translated here also It can be omitted in 
 translation altogether, though it may denote here 
 an intimate connection between this verse and 
 ver. 15, as between eating and drinking. — W. H. 
 H.] My teeth with gravel stones. — He 
 broke my teeth ivith pebbles. It is a matter of in- 
 difference whether we regard this as meaning 
 bread mixed with stones, or stones instead of 
 bread. He hath covered me w^ith ashes. 
 — He covered me with ashes. The ashes here seem 
 to be intended as a symbol of mourning, as they 
 are in the well-known usages of mourning. See 
 2 Sam. xiii. 19; Job ii. 8 ; Mic. i. 10. 
 
 VXn, lapillus, a little stone, occurs besides here 
 only in Prov. xx. 17 (Ps. Ixxvii. 18). [Prov. xx. 
 17, "Bread of deceit is sweet to a man; but 
 afterwards his mouth shall be filled with gravel," 
 seems to be an allusion to the grit that often is 
 mixed with bread baked in ashes, and thus may 
 explain this passage. Blayney, Boothroyd, 
 Owen and Henderson, translate the word grit. 
 Henderson's inelegant translation. He hath made 
 my teeth cranch grit, and Ewald's er Hess nieine 
 Zdhne zermalmen Steine, is inconsistent with the 
 use of the preposition 3, the presumptive power 
 of the verb D^J (see Gerlach), and the apparent 
 meaning of this passage especially when com- 
 pared with Prov. XX. 17, — the pebbles were not 
 broken by the teeth, but the teeth wer« broken 
 by the pebbles. — A curious result of translating 
 from a translation is exhibited in the Vulg. The 
 Sept. having rendered this 'E^t:(3a'Afv Tp/'/OiJ Tovg 
 dSovra^ fiov, the Vclo., taking Tpr/cpoc; as calculus 
 arithmeticus, translated Et fregit ad numencm (in 
 full number, or by number, Douay "one by one") 
 denies meos. — W. H. 11.] 
 
 Vers. 17, 18. These verses constitute the con- 
 clusion and culmination point of the Lamenta- 
 tion. The speaker, dropping the metaphorical 
 and adopting the literal style, utters a threefold 
 declaration. 1. That the Lord had thrust liim 
 back, as it were, from the dominion of peace 
 
 (0J7ty, peace, is to be taken in its broadest sense, 
 see below). To this objective act, what follows 
 corresponds as -subjective. 2. That the speaker 
 has been deprived of all happiness, even to the 
 recollection of it. 3. That he — and this is the 
 acme of his sorrow — regarded even his confidence 
 and hope in Jehovah as destroyed. 
 
110 
 
 I'HE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 Ver. 17. And thou hast removed my soul 
 far off from peace. — Thou thmsledsl away viy 
 soul from peace. This is a quotiition from Ps. 
 Ixxxviii. 15, wliich Psalm our Poet so often avails 
 himself of. This explains why the Poet so sud- 
 denly addresses God in the second person. 
 [Wordsworth: "By an affecting transition, the 
 Prophet turns to the Almighty, whom he sees 
 present, and addresses llim, Thou hast removed 
 my soul far off from peace ; adopting the language 
 of another Passion Psalm (^Ixxxviii. 14-18)."] 
 
 Peace (D)7iy) is happiness In the widest sense, as 
 often, and stands in parallelism with good (n31£3)- 
 See Jer. viii. 15; xiv. 9, "We looked for peace, 
 but no good came." 1 forgat prosperity 
 fmarg., ^-ooc?). — I forgot good. The speaker has 
 been deprived of all happiness, even to the recol- 
 lection of it. [LowTH : " So Joseph spe.aking of 
 the seven years of famine saith that 'plenty shall 
 \)Q forgotten in the land of Egypt.' "] 
 
 Many old translators take '^3J as the subject 
 of njlj^l. Jerome: Expulsa est a pace anima mea. 
 Venet. Gr. : 'ATTfVr^^r' a7r' elpr/vT^r y eu// ijwx>/. 
 Syriac: data est oblivioni a pace anima mea. 
 [Calvin: Etrevwtafuit a pace anima mea. Brouqh- 
 T0\: and my soul is cant off from peace.'\ But these 
 translations evidently proceed from philological 
 ignorance. For rUI is never used intransitively 
 (not even in Hos. viii. 5). These translators 
 seem also to have stumbled at the fact that here 
 suddenly God is addressed in the second person. 
 Among the moderns also, Thenius and Ewald 
 take 'K/£)3 as the subject. But they take |p njl 
 likewise in a sense it never has, namely, of loath- 
 ing. Thenius translates, so that I loathe happi- 
 7iess. EwALD : Happiness has become loathsome to 
 me. To this we object, because no one ever feels 
 a loathing of happiness, — nor is D1 7ty equivalent 
 to life, in which case it might indicate a satiety 
 or weariness of life, but Dwty is the enjoyment 
 of life. They have overlooked the fact that this 
 passage is a quotation from Ps. Ixxxviii. 15, of 
 which our Poet so often avails himself. There 
 it is said "K/iJJ HJrn niri' noS. This explains 
 
 •:--:• T : t t *^ 
 
 why the Poet so suddenly addresses God in the 
 second person, avA determines the meaning of 
 n^T, which can only be, as everywhere else, re- 
 jicere, repelle*e. That nJT is construed with |D 
 (as elsevrher , cmly once, in Hiphil, 2 Chron. xi. 
 14) need ..lOt surprise us, for there is nothing in 
 the word itself that would make this construction 
 appear as unauthorized or even strange. [Ger- 
 LACH, while rejecting the opinions of Thenius 
 and EwALD, adopts the idea of the old transla- 
 tors, Und es ward verstossen vom Frieden meine 
 See/e. and strangely appeals to 2 Chron. xi. 14, to 
 ju-^tify theintransitiveuse of theverb. — W. H. H.] 
 Ver. 18. And I said, My strength and my 
 hope is perished from the Lord. — Over and 
 yone from Jehoiuih is my confidence and hope. 
 [1)UOUGHton : Ami I thought iji myself, viy state is 
 undone and my hope from the Eternal. Hender- 
 s.iN : And I said. My confidence is perished, and my 
 hope from Jehovah. Not only had all present en- 
 
 joyment been annihilated, but all prospect of 
 future prosperity had been cut ofi"."] The Poet 
 here represents the sum total, as it were, of his 
 punishment, the separate details, which he has 
 been narrating, beginning at ver. 1, being re- 
 garded as the several items of a sum in arithme- 
 tic. The result is an alarming one. His con- 
 fidence and his hope in the Lord had been almost 
 destroyed by the uuiutermitied blows of the rod 
 of wrath (vers. 1-3). But they had not been 
 actually destroyed. This we learn from the ex- 
 pression, and I said, ^0j<^. Without this word 
 
 T It 
 
 ver. 18 would have a much more equivocal sense. 
 But this indicates that the Poet would represent 
 the loss of his confidence, not as an actual fact 
 (else he would have said 'IJX]'^), but as merely an 
 anticipatory thought. He said, i. e., he thought 
 so to himself, as in Jer. iii. 7, "IDS^I represents 
 merely a speaking to one's self, /. e , a thought, a 
 feeling. [See instances of this use of the expres- 
 sion in Gen. xxvi. 9; 1 Sam. xx. 3; 2 Sam. 
 xxi. 16; 1 Kings viii. 12, etc.—Vf. H. H.] That 
 he had not actually lost his confidence is, finally, 
 most apparent from what follows, where the Poet, 
 with all his soul's energy, refastens the bond of 
 confidence that had threatened to break. [Henry: 
 " Without doubt it was his infirmity to say thus, 
 Ps. Ixxvii. 10, for with God there is everlasting 
 strength, and He is His people's never failing 
 hope, whatever they may think."] 
 
 n^X followed by |D, has different senses. This 
 JD often indicates the person or place suffering 
 the loss; ^I'B'O DUO H^N; Ps. cxlii. 5; comp. 
 
 • V • T - T 
 
 Job xi. 20; xviii. 17; Jer. xviii. 18; xxv. 35; 
 xlix. 7, 38, etc. It can be taken thus here. For 
 the thought that Jehovah has lost the confidence 
 of the Poet, can be expressed in the form here 
 used. Yet it is well to observe here that the 
 words cannot be translated, my confidence and 
 my hope in Jehovah are lost [as Noyes does]. 
 For the object of confidence is always indicated 
 
 by 3, b^, Sx, or, as especially after ri^ntn, Ps. 
 xxxix. 8, by /. But the sense is, my confidence 
 is perished away from Jehovah, it has lost its 
 direction towards Him. It is a constriu-tio prseg- 
 nans: my confidence is turned away from God, 
 and thus has become destroyed. JD could also 
 be taken with reference to the efi&cient cause. See 
 n3K' mbx nOE/jp, Job iv. 9 ; Ps. Ixxx. 17. [So 
 Blayney and Boothroyd: Jehovah hath caused my 
 strength and my hope tofail.'] Yet, if [D had only 
 this sense, and not at the same time the local 
 sense of away from, we would rather expect 'J3p» 
 
 as we readPs. Ixviii. 3, D'rih»X 'JSD D'j;t^-l n3X\ 
 — nVJ. That this root contains the ideas of 
 splendor, strength and endurance, is certain. 
 Which is its original meaning is disputed. Here, 
 as in 1 Sam. v. 29, the idea seems to be strength 
 with the modification of perseverance, persever- 
 ing steadfastness and confidence. At least this 
 
 best suits the intimately connected word 'flyllin. 
 
CHAP. III. 19-42. Ill 
 
 PART n. 
 
 in. 19-42. 
 
 y Ver. 19. Remember my affliction and my wandering, 
 
 The wormwood and the gall, 
 f Ver. 20. Yea, Thou wilt indeed remember 
 
 That my soul is bowed down in me. 
 \ Ver. 21. This will I take to my heart, 
 
 Therefore will I hope. 
 
 n Ver. 22. Because of Jehovah's mercies, we are not consumed; 
 
 For His compassions fail not : 
 n Ver. 23. They are new every morning : 
 
 Great is Thy faithfulness. 
 n Ver. 24. My portion is Jehovah, saith my soul ; 
 
 Therefore will I hope in Him. 
 to Ver. 25. Good is Jehovah to them that wait for Him, 
 
 To the soul that seeketh Him. 
 Ver. 26. Good is it both to hope and silently wait 
 
 For the salvation of Jehovah. 
 Ver. 27. Good is it for a man, 
 
 That he bear the yoke in his youth. 
 '> Ver. 28. He sitteth alone and is silent. 
 
 Because He imposed it upon him: 
 f Ver. 29. He putteth his mouth in the dust, 
 
 Peradventure, there may be hope! 
 ♦ Ver. 30. He offereth his cheek to him that smiteth him ; 
 
 He is filled with reproach. 
 
 2 Ver. 31. For the Lord will not cast off 
 
 Forever ! 
 
 3 Ver. 32. For though He hath caused grief. 
 
 Yet is He moved to compassion according to His great mercft 
 D Ver. 33. For He doth not willingly afflict 
 . And grieve the children of men. 
 
 7 Ver. 34. To trample under his feet 
 . All prisoners of the earth, — 
 
 7 Ver. 35. To deprive a man of his rights 
 . Before the face of the Most High, — 
 
 7 Ver. 36. To subvert a man in his cause, — 
 
 The Lord approveth not ! 
 Ver. 37. Who is he that spoke and it was done, 
 
 Except the Lord commanded ? 
 Q Ver. 38. Cometh not the evil as well as the good 
 
 From the mouth of the Most High ? 
 Ver. 39. Why murmur living men — 
 
 Every one for his sins ? 
 
 J Ver. 40. Let us search and try our ways, 
 
 And return to Jehovah. 
 J Ver. 41. Let us lift up our heart together with our hands 
 
 To God in the Heavens. 
 J Ver. 42. We — have sinned and rebelled. 
 
 Thou — hast not pardoned. 
 
312 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 ANALYSIS. 
 
 In the second part, vers. 19-42, the Poet rises out of the night of sorrow into the clear day of comfort and 
 hope; yet he allows, as it were, a morning dawn to precede, and an evening twilight to follow this day. 
 Vers. 19-21 contain a transition. The Poet can again pray ! He prays the Lord to be once more 
 mindful of him, vers. 19, 20; and on his own part he sets about to seek for grounds of comfort, ver. 
 21. These he finds, first of all, in the fact that Israel is not completely destroyed, that there is yet a 
 remnant, as a starting point for a return to the belter fortune which is notv at hand. This fact is due 
 to the grace and mercy of God, the continuation of which the Poet recognizes with the deepest joy, vers. 
 22-24. From, this point of view, afforded by the Divine mercy, the Poet now looks upon his sorroivs : 
 — the Lord even when He smites, always means it for good, vers. 25-27; — if it be borne patiently, 
 with silent submission, vers. 28-30, — then the rays of Divine compassion will again appear, vers. 31- 
 33. Vieived from this stand-point, every sorrow, even that inflicted upon us by human malignity, seems 
 a wholesome divine ordinance, — so that not the sorroio itself, but only the .tin that caused it. is to be 
 deplored, vers. 34-39. Such a lamentation for sin, the cause of the affliction suffered, the Poet note 
 begins, not in his own name, but in that of all the people, vers. 40-42. And as he had skilfully in- 
 troduced this lamentation by the self-accusation in ver. 39, so these three verses, 40-42, serve him as a 
 means of transition to a new lamentation over the misfortunes that had befallen the nation. With the 
 
 words prijD Xv, Thou hast not pardoned, ver. 42, he turns to the description of the common mis- 
 fortune. 
 
 with similar words. Thus vers. 25-27 begin with 
 
 a'lD, vers. 28-30 with the Imperfects 2^\ ]r\\ {n\ 
 vers. 31-33 with ''2, vers. 34-36 with 7 before an 
 Infinitive, and vers. 37-39 are interrogative sen- 
 tences. It should also be observed that from ver. 
 22 the Poet no longer speaks in the first person 
 singular. It is as if he felt the necessity, at this 
 culmination point of the Poem, of letting the in- 
 dividual step back behind the sublime and uni^ 
 versal truth which he pronounces. 
 
 PRELIMINARY NOTE. 
 
 In this eminently consolatory passage, vers. 
 19-42, with its introduction, vers. 19-21, and con- 
 clusion, vers. 40-42, every triad of verses consti- 
 tutes, as regards sense, a complete whole. The 
 etfect of similarity of construction is further 
 heightened in vers. 25-39, by the fact that the 
 triplets of each verse begin, not only with the 
 same initial letter, but with the same word, or 
 
 m. 19-21. 
 
 19 Remembering mine affliction and my misery, the wormwood and the gall. 
 20, 21 My soul hath them still in remembrance, and is humble in me. This I recall 
 to my mind, therefore have I hope. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 19.— 'Jj;. See remarks i. 3. — ''ino'l. see i. 7. [Gerlach translates it expulsion, exile, verstossuug. Blaynet, 
 BooTHBOTD, Oven ■ abasement. Henderson : persecution. Broughton : vexation.]— 'H}^^!, see ver. 15. — E^N^i see ver. 5. 
 
 T-:|- 
 
 Ver. 20.— iJx^ .cio n^U? occurs, except here, only in Ps. xliv. 26 ; Prov. ii. 18. The root PI' li? is nowliere found. — 
 n'IS'ni- To take 1 in the sense of quod (Rosenmceller, Vaihinger, Enqelhardt), is an arbitrary rendering that receives 
 no support from the reference to Gen. xxx. 27. 
 
 Ver. 21.— The expression 3S~Sn yWH, to take something to heart, is never found in Jeremiah : see Deut. iv. 36 ; xxx. 
 
 1 ; Is. xliv. 19 ; xlvi. 8 ; 1 Kings viii. 47.— S'TliX- See Jer. iv. 19. The anomalous form there found, D /imX, 's traced 
 
 back to Hn or rr\, but 7n' in no form occurs in Jeremiah ; therefore here again a difference in the use of language is 
 
 apparent. Forms of SlT occur in Lamentations only in this chapter, namely, verb forms in vers. 21, 24, noun forms in 
 
 vers. 18, 26. [If Jeremiah could coin an entirely new word in his prophecies and use it only once, we might allow him to 
 introduce into the Lamentations words already coined and familiar to him in other Scriptures, even if he confine this use to 
 
 one place or one chapter.— W. H. H.]— 13-^^' has its usual signification, therefore, for that reason. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 The artistic management of the composition 
 should be here observed. The whole preceding 
 recital from ver. 1, constitutes a crescendo move- 
 ment, which ends in ver. 18 with a shrill dis- 
 sonance, enhanced by (he fac* tliat it closes with 
 the name o." .Jehovah, here mentioned for tlie first 
 time. But tins dissonance, after ver. 21, is lost 
 in the most agreeable harmony. The three in- 
 tervening verses, 19-21, constitute the transition 
 from discord to harmony. 
 
 Vers. 19, 20. As if shocked that so terrible a 
 thought could come into his mind, the Poet rouses 
 himself up and directs a cry of anguish from the 
 depths of his heart to the Lord, that He would 
 not forget and reject him, but would graciously 
 remember him. [Gerlach: "The prophet is 
 certain, that if God will only be rightly mindful 
 of the misery poured out over him. His pity must 
 be excited (Vaih.), and this certainly is immedi- 
 ately expressed with assurance in ver. 20.'"] 
 
 Ver. I'.t. Remembering mine affliction 
 and my misery, the w^ormwood and the 
 gall. — Remember [so E. V., margi?i, all the English 
 
CHAP. III. 19-21. 
 
 113 
 
 versions except Blatnet, the Taro., Vulg., and 
 Str.] my affliction and my wanderings (see i. 7), 
 wormwood and y all ! The Poet thus represents to 
 the Lord the most striking features of his suffer- 
 ings as depicted in the preceding verses. [The 
 repetition of the three emphatic words, in which 
 the idea of misei-y is condensed, ''JJ^ affliction or 
 misery, ver. 1, nJJ^ / wormwood, ver. 15, K'X'l gall 
 or bitterness, ver. 15, shows that this verse is a 
 brief and emphatic recapitulation of the whole 
 preceding description. But with all these in view, 
 the Prophet rejects the thought he was tempted 
 to indulge, as expressed in ver. 18, and " does 
 not let go his hold on the God of his life ; but is 
 convinced that if He will only regard him, all 
 will be well " (Henderson). — W. H. H.] 
 
 Many interpreters stumble at the fact that the 
 Poet, immediately after the cry of despair in ver. 
 
 18, should again address a prayer to Jehovah. 
 Many, therefore, (Bottcher, Thenius) take IJT 
 and *li3Tn "lOI, ver. 20, as the subject of a hypo- 
 thetical proposition, Remember my misery . . . 
 yea, my soul remembers it and hinnblet itself in me. 
 [E. V. : Remembering mine affliction . . . My soul 
 hath them still in remembrance and is humbled in 7?ie.] 
 But to take the Inf. Constr. 131 in a finite sense, 
 is altogether ungrammatical and without pre- 
 cedent. EwALD, indeed, takes "ijl as an Impera- 
 tive, but as an address " to the first best hearer." 
 He also takes li3rr\, ver. 20, for the third person 
 feminine, My soul, holds up before itself [remem- 
 bers with self-reproach], it humbles itself in me. 
 It seems to me that all these interpreters exag- 
 gerate the suddenness of the transition from the 
 cry of ver. 18 to the prayer of ver. 19, and do not 
 rightly apprehend it. They overlook the soften- 
 ing effect of 1D^^ and I said \_i. e., to myself], 
 and they fail to observe that the prayer immedi- 
 ately following in ver. 19, plainly shows that the 
 language of ver. 18 was the expression of a rash 
 but conquered moment of despair. Thus the 
 Poet, by the fact that he can again pray in this 
 way, plainly gives us to understand that his 
 despair had secured no strong foot-hold in his 
 breast. Some regard ll^Iil, ver. 20, as the 
 second person masculine indeed, but in the Indi- 
 cative sense, — truly thou tliinkest thereon, — indi- 
 cating the hearing of the prayer uttered in ver. 
 
 19. But in that case the sentence should not be 
 continued with the Imperfect. It should have 
 been, nnt^'l. See my Gr., g 84, n. f. ["The 
 perfect is used to denote a fact which can only 
 be repiesented as accomplished in actual reality, 
 but which happens, as respects time, intheiraniedi- 
 ate, unconditioned future." Naegelsbach's Gr.] 
 
 We not only regnrd IDT as a prayer directed to 
 the Lord, but "llSJi^, ver. 20, as an emphatic 
 repetition of it. [Some old commentators trans- 
 lated "IJT as the Inf., but regarded ver. 19, as in 
 close connection with ver. 18. See Muenster: 
 Secundam quosdam est T1DI infinit., ut sit sensus: 
 per tit spes mea, recordante me afflictionis mese (Ger- 
 lach). The interpretation of this verse must be 
 determined by the gender and person, or subject 
 of -l13in iu ver. 20.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 20. My soul hath them still in re- 
 membrance, and is humbled in me. — Re- 
 
 member, yea remember, that my soul composes itself 
 in me.* [Lit. Remembering Thou wilt remember, i. e., 
 according to the familiar Hebrew idiom. Thou 
 ivilt certainly remember. CranmerBib.: Yea thou 
 shall remember them ; for my soul melteth away in 
 me. Owen : Remembering thou wilt remember them, 
 for botved down within me is my soul. Noyes : Yea, 
 thou ivilt remember them, for my soul is bowed down 
 within me. Gerlach: Remembering Thou wilt in- 
 deed remember that my soul is bowed down ivithin 
 me. The last is undoubtedly most literal and 
 exact. — W. H. H.] — After the prayer, so em- 
 phatically repeated. Remember, Oh do Thou remem- 
 ber, what immediately follows can only indicate 
 something favorable, — that my soul comjjoses itself 
 in me. The meaning of the verb T\W (see also 
 T\X\W and T\T\f^) can only be sedere, desidere, [to 
 sit, sink or settle down"^. The Kal in Ps. xliv. 26, 
 is evidently taken in a bad sense, "For our soul 
 
 is bowed down to the dust," ^lil^B} '^2yh r\r\^. 
 
 •■ : - TT V T T 
 
 The Hiphil (for there is no apparent reason for 
 forsaking the K'tib) is to be taken either in the 
 indirect causative sense, denoting to cause that 
 something sinks, sits down, or in direct causative 
 sense, to cause sinking, to sink one's self, to sit down. 
 Since, according to what precedes, the Poet's soul 
 had been excited in the highest degree, furiously 
 agitated (see "l?^pn, i. 20; ii. 11), the meaning 
 to sink itself, sit down, become calm, would be ad- 
 mirably appropriate here, and the more so be- 
 cause, according to what precedes, the Poet had 
 brought reproach upon his soul, by an ebullition 
 of feeling of an unjustifiable kind, and bordering 
 upon defiance. It is certainly seemly for such a 
 soul to sink down, as it were, into itself, and to 
 become still, as the ocean returning to rest after a 
 
 furious storm. The expression in me, v^, ia 
 used here as in Ps. xlii. 5, 6, 7, 12 ; xliii. 5 ; 
 cxxxi. 2 ; cxlii. 4 ; Jer. viii. 18, etc. See De- 
 LiTzscH Psych., IV., § 1, pp. 151, 152. There 
 lies in it the idea of heaviness, as if the heart felt 
 burdened. [Wordsworth: '' My soul *** sinks 
 down upon me. The soul (Hebr. nephesh) is the 
 seat of the agitated affections, and it sinks down, 
 as it were, in a swoon, upon the Spirit (Hebr. 
 rudch), the diviner faculty, and overwhelms it. 
 Comp. Ps. xlii. 4-6 ; xliv. 25 ; Ixxvii. 3 ; cxlii. 
 3." — The commentators have succeeded in ob- 
 scuring the meaning of this verse, by many possi- 
 ble or impossible translations, for which the curi- 
 ous may safely consult Gerlach, but the real mean- 
 ing is expressed by the most natural translation of 
 the words. Remembering Thou wilt remember, i. e.. 
 Thou wilt surely remember, that my soul sinks within 
 me, or is boived down in me, or upon me (literally, ac- 
 cording both to Naegelsbach and Wordsworth ), 
 i. e., is humbled in penitence and overwhelmed 
 with sorrow. So Gerlach. — W. H. H,] 
 
 Ver. 21. This I recall to my mind (marg., 
 make to return to my heart), therefore have I 
 
 * [Wordsworth mistranslates N.iEGELSBACH, — Rememhir, 
 remember Tliou, that my soul sinks wWiin inc. Gedenke, jv 
 gudoiike, Dass lueiue Seele sicli beruhige in mir. Sir'i 
 berulugrn means to quiet, compose one's self. Besitk-.-;, his 
 note.s explain the Hebrew in the sense of sinking down into 
 a state of list afttr great agitation. — W. H. U.j 
 
il4 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 hope. — This will I take to my heart, on this account 
 will I hope. The effect of the soul's becoming 
 Biibraissive and acquiescent is, that it now again 
 takes lo heart those facts which, notwithstanding 
 all iiardships endured at the hand of the Lord, 
 yet always encourage the exercise of confidence 
 in Him. This (Hli) cannot refer to what pre- 
 cedes. Still less can therefore (J3~7^), of the 
 second clause. For what precedes is only a 
 prayer, Avith no positive promise. Ver. 21 is the 
 immediate introduction to the impressive con- 
 solatoi-y section which begins with ver. 22. It 
 is shown in what follows, why the Poet still 
 clierishes hope. See the conclusion of ver. 24, 
 therefore ivill I hope in Him. [The awkward re- 
 ference of the this and therefore of ver. 21, to what 
 follows, which is rendered necessary by the 
 translation of ver. 20, adopted by Naegelsbach 
 and others, is a strong argument against the cor- 
 rectness of that translation. 1. The position of 
 the this, as the first word of the sentence, 
 strengthens the likelihood that it refers to some- 
 thing just stated, rather than to something about 
 to be stated. If we explain its position iu the 
 sentence by the necessity of the proper initial 
 letter, this may show how much the style is af- 
 fected by the artificial structure of the poem, and 
 greatly weakens the argument of those who ima- 
 gine they discover differences between the style 
 of the Lamentations, and of Jeremiah's Pro- 
 phecies. But 2. The this and therefore, if they re- 
 fer to what follows, lead us to expect an imme- 
 diate, clear and definite proposition, to which 
 they would logically correspond. But there is 
 no such proposition stated, but certain general 
 truths follow, which only remotely and by a men- 
 tal process of our own minds, can be made to 
 satisfy the requirements of the this and therefore 
 in ver. 21. 3. The attempt to establish a con- 
 nection between the therefore I hope in ver. 21, 
 
 and the same expression at the end of ver. 24, as 
 if one were an index finger pointing forward, 
 and the other an index finger pointing backward, 
 showing that all that lies between them is the 
 this, on account of which the prophet says there- 
 fore I hope, is open to the following objections. 
 («) The therefore of ver. 24, can only logically re- 
 fer to the words immediately preceding, " Je- 
 hovah is my portion, saith my soul." (6) The 
 therefore, in ver. 24, ia restricted to what imme- 
 diately precedes by the addition of the words 
 " in Him." If it had been intended to correspond 
 with and explain the declaration of ver. 21, it 
 should have been "therefore I hope in this,'' i. e., 
 in the doctrine contained in all the preceding 
 verses, to which the this of ver. 21 refers, (c) 
 The fact that there is as much in the verses im- 
 mediately following ver. 24, as in those im- 
 mediately preceding it, to afford hope and com- 
 fort, makes it exceedingly improbable that ver. 
 24 terminates a section begun in ver. 21. [d) If 
 the therefore, of ver. 24, refers to a proposition 
 preceding and not following it, it is likely that 
 the therefore of ver. 21 does also. 4. The trans- 
 lation of ver. 20, as Cranmer's Bible, Owen and 
 NoYES translate it (see above on ver. 20), or as 
 Rosenmueller translates it [Enim vero reminis- 
 ceris, hoc animo meo medilor), and still more as 
 (jrERLACH translates it. Thou wilt certainly remem- 
 ber that my soul is bowed down in me, or upon me, 
 renders the meaning of ver. 21 clear and un- 
 equivocal. This assurance, that God is mindful 
 of the soul that is bowed down upon itself, in 
 sorrow and penitence, the Prophet takes to heart, 
 and therefore hope revives in his bosom. We 
 thus have a graceful and easy introduction to 
 the beautiful passage that follows in which the 
 thought expressed in ver. 20, that God is mindful 
 of the submissive patient sufferer, is expanded 
 and reappears at every point. — W. H. H.] 
 
 III. 22-24. 
 
 22 It is of the Lord's mercies that we are not consumed, because his compassions 
 23, 24 fail not. They are new every morning : great is thy faithfulness. The Lord 
 is my portion, saith my soul ; therefore will I hope in him. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 22.— rnon. Gerlach argues that the use in Jer. xliv. of ^JDH, in ver. 18, for the first person plural, and of ^Ofl, 
 : |T : T 
 
 in vers. 12, 27, for tlie third i)or8on plural, is decisive evidence of the Jeremiac use of language in the Lamentations. — W. 
 H. H.]— The plural O'lOn, "ot found in Jeremiah, is frequent elsewhere, ver. 31 ; Gen. xxxii. 11 ; Is. Ixiii. 7 ; Ps. Ixxix. 
 
 2; cvii. 43, eic— D'OH^, Jer. xvi. 5; xlii. 12.-^^2, Jer. viii. 20; xiv. 6; xvi. 4, etc. 
 
 Ver. 23.— D'lr'in is in apposition to l^m — l^lfl, Jer. xxxi. 22, 31.— D'TpaS, Is. xxxiii. 2; Ps. Ixxiii. 14; ci. 8. 
 • T-: T-: |- TT • It : - 
 
 Jeremiah nses TpiS in this sense only once.— nj^OX, Jer.v.l, 3; vii. 28; ix. 2. 
 
 Ver. 24.— The"expression 'C'SJ iTlDX occurs only here.— 1^. This construction with ^ occurs, Ps. xxxviii. 16; xlii. 
 • : - T : |T 
 6, 12 ; xliii. 6 ; Mic. vii. V, etc. 
 
 stitutes the middle portion both of the third 
 
 chapter and of the whole book. For as chapter 
 
 EXEQETICAL AND CRITICAL. ^j^j^.j gg^^^piyy t^e middle place among the five 
 
 Vers. 22-24. It should be especially observed Songs, so the two decades of verses, vers. 22-42, 
 here that the passage which is full of the richest constitute almost exactly the middle part of chap- 
 tomfort and which includes vers. 22-42, con- ter third. Here the author skilfully introduces 
 
CHAP. III. 22-24. 
 
 115 
 
 the sunshine. He permits the bright day of 
 hope and resignation to follow the night of despair 
 described in ver. 18. Immediately following 
 these verses, however, the misery of the people 
 and of the Prophet is again, depicted in the 
 gloomiest colors, so that this bright part is, as it 
 were, framed in on both sides with deep dark- 
 ness, which serves as a back-ground to make the 
 colors of this picture of consolation stand out with 
 greater distinctness. And so, as it were, the 
 dome of the building, artistically constructed of 
 these toarfnl Sougs, rises up as a pyramid of 
 light out of painful darkness, by which means 
 the comforting truth, that for believers the 
 sun of happiness will at last triumph over the 
 night of misery and suffering, is placed con- 
 sjiicuously in the clearest and strongest light. 
 First of all the joyful announcement is made, 
 vers. 22-24, that, by the grace of God, Israel is 
 not yet completely undone. There is still a 
 remnant which can serve as a connecting link 
 for the new order of things. This great favor 
 Israel owes to the mercy of God, which is not yet 
 exhausted, but rather in consequence of it the 
 faithfulness of God renews itself every morning, 
 so that the Poet can proclaim with assurance, as 
 a noble anchor of hope and consolation, that the 
 Lord is his portion, and that be may still say to 
 his God " Thou art mine." 
 
 Ver. 22. It is of the LORD'S mercies that 
 we are not consumed, because his com- 
 passions fail not. — -Because of Jehovah's mercies 
 we are not consumed [Gnaden Jehovah's sind es, 
 dass wir nicht gar aus sind. So also, word for 
 word, Gerlach], for his compassion has no end. 
 [The E. V. is more accurate, because his compas- 
 sions fail not. — AV. H. H.] The fact that the Poet 
 here speaks in the first person plural, when else- 
 where, down to ver. 40, he speaks only of him- 
 self, is explained by what has been already shown, 
 that he fastens the cords of his own personal 
 hope to the fact that the people still exists, even 
 if only as a weak remnant. But that even sucli 
 a kernel remains, he ascribes to the grace of God. 
 [See these transitions from singular to plural 
 and back again, explained in remarks intro- 
 ductory to the chapter.] The use of the plural in 
 mercies involves the idea of manifestations of 
 grace, or illustrations of grace, in the way of 
 instruction and of example. Many acts of Di- 
 vine grace shown to many individuals, combine 
 in the result. Since the mercies (the several acts 
 of grace) of Jehovah can only be regarded as the 
 efiiuence of His compassion, we take the second '3 
 as a causative particle, ^^for His compassion has 
 no end." The compassion of God is the ground 
 of His graciousness, in consequence of which Is- 
 rael is not entirely undone. 
 
 If we could take OOH for the third person 
 plural, as the Chaldaic, Stbiac and manj 
 
 moderns do (Ewald, Thenids, Delitzch on Is. 
 xxiii. 11), the sense of this place would be en- 
 tirely clear. [We could then translate with Cal- 
 vin, The mercies of Jehovah ! surely they are not 
 consumed. In which Owen, Blaynet and BooTH- 
 ROYD substantially agree. — W. H. H.] But, 
 notwithstanding the fact that in Ps. Ixiv. 7, 
 UpD seems even more plainly than here as if it 
 must be taken for the third person plural [not 
 necessarily. See J. A. Alexander in loc.'\, yet 
 Olshausen is certainly right when he shows, | 
 82 u. that the insertion of 3 as a compensation 
 for the reduplication of the consonant, is in vio- 
 lation of all the established rules of Grammar. 
 It may be that at several of those doubtful places 
 that are referred to (Is. xxiii. 11 ; Lam. iii. 22 ; 
 Ps. Ixiv. 7; Prov. xxvi. 7; Ezr. x. 16) false 
 readings have slipped in. But here this suppo- 
 sition is unnecessary. Here as in Num. xvii. 28, 
 and Jer. xliv. 18. ^JOn is the first person plural. 
 
 Ver. 23. They are new every morning. 
 [They, i. e., the mercies of Jehovah, which are ever 
 renewed because His compassion fails not: for His 
 mercies are the fruit of His conipasson (see notes 
 on ver. 22).— W. H. H.]— Great is thy faith- 
 fulness. — Faithfulness is only a form of compas- 
 sionate love. It is love enduring In all circum- 
 stances. [Calvin: " Were God to take away the 
 promise, all the miserable would inevitably per- 
 ish; for they can never lay hold on His mercy 
 except through His word. This, then, is the 
 reason why Scripture so often connects these 
 two things together, even God's mercy and His 
 faithfulness in fulfilling His promises."] 
 
 Ver. 24. Vers. 22,23, treated only of objective 
 facts. From these a subjective conclusion is 
 now drawn. Since the Lord is so gracious, 
 merciful and faithful, the Poet esteems Him as 
 the dearest treasure of his soul, as his best por- 
 tion, and the foundation of his hope. The 
 LORD is my portion. — My portion is Jehovah. 
 This seems to refer to Num. xviii. 20, where the 
 Lord, having told Aaron that he should receive 
 no hereditary portion in the land, says to him, 
 " I am thy part l^portion'] and thine inheritance." 
 The same expression is found in Ps. xvi. 5; Ixxiii. 
 26; cxix. 57; cxlii. 6. See Jer. x. 16; li. 19; 
 Deut. xxxii. 9. Saith my soul. — [Calvin : 
 "He speaks emphatically, that his soul had thus 
 said . . . The unbelieving also confess that God 
 is the fountain of all blessings, and that they 
 ought to acquiesce in Him ; but with the mouth 
 only they confess this, while they believe nothing 
 less. This then is the reason why the Prophet 
 ascribes what he says to his soul, as though he 
 had said, that he did not boast like hypocrites 
 that God was his portion, but of this he had a 
 thorough conviction."] Therefore will I hope 
 in him. — See ver. 21. 
 
116 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 III. 25-33. 
 
 25 The Lord is good unto them that wait for him, to the soul that seeketh him. 
 
 26 It is good that a man should both hope and quietly wait for the salvation of the 
 27, 28 Lord. It is good for a man that he bear the yoke in his youth. He sitteth 
 
 29 alone und keepeth silence, because he hath borne it upon him. He putteth his mouth 
 
 30 in the dust, if so be there may be hope. He ^iveth his cheek to him that smiteth 
 
 31 him : he is filled full with reproach. For the Lord will not cast off for ever. 
 
 32 But though he cause grief, yet will he have compassion according to the multitude 
 
 33 of his mercies. For he doth not afflict willingly, nor grieve the children of men. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL, 
 
 Ver. 25. — Kal of HID is not found in Jeremiah; he uses only Niphal iii. 17, and Piel viii. 15; xiii. 16; xiv. 19, 22. 
 tIt . . 
 
 Kindred expressions are found in Ps. xxv. 3; Ixix. 7 ; Is. xlix. 23. — The expression niiT IMi 1!?"^^ is found in Jeremiah 
 
 T : •• - T 
 several times and in different senses, x. 21 (?) ; xxi. 2; xxix. 13 ; xxxvii. 7. Yet none of these places seem to have heen in 
 
 the Poet's eye. If some earlier declaration was in his mind, it was apparently Deut. iv. 29, where it is said ^3^"^nr\ '3 
 
 Ver. 26.— [See crit. notes helow.]—T\^Wry, Jer. iii. 23. 
 
 Ver. 27.— bj^. See i. 14. S^ J<tJ?J occurs only here.— D"'"1-1^3 frequently in Jeremiah, iii. 4; xxiv. 25, ete. 
 
 Ver. 28. — 7£D J, not in Jeremiah. It occurs, besides here, only in 2 Sam. xxiv. 12 ; Is. Ixiii. 9. 7itD', Is. xl. 15, is pro- 
 bably from 7!|£3> to turn aside (see Deutzsch at this place), of which verb Jeremiah makes frequent use, xvi. 13 ; ixii. 
 26, 28. 
 
 Ver. 29.— [This verse is wanting in the Sept.] — 'l-IX Jeremiah uses often, xxi. 2; xxvi. 3, 7; li. 8. [Calvin: "Ths 
 
 particle 'SlX expresses what is difiScult ; for when anything appears to be incredible, the Hebrews say, 1/it may 6e."]— The 
 phrase mpjl K?' '» found not only in Prov. xix. 18, but also in Jer. xxxi. 17. 
 
 Ver. 30.— Neither the Part. 7130, nor "'n'?, see i. 2, occurs in Jeremiah : TlS JHJ 's found in Is. 1. 6.— The expression 
 713^113 Vy!i/ occurs only here, yet there is a similar construction [of J^2U with 3, instead of j4cc.] in Ps. Ixv. 5; Ixxxviii. 
 
 4. The words y3tl? and 713111, by themselves, are current in Jeremiah ; see for the first, xxxi. 14; xlvi. 10; 1. 10, for the 
 
 - T T : ■.• 
 
 other vi. 10; xv. 15 ; xx. 8 ; xxiv. 9, etc. 
 
 Ver. 31. — Jeremiah never uses HJT, see ver. 17 ; ii. 7. 
 
 Ver. 32.— nj'in, see i. 4 ; v. 12.— 0711, often in Jeremiah, xii. 15 ; xxxi. 20 ; xlii. 12, etc.— nOTl 3i3 is found, pointed 
 T - • TT-: : 
 
 thus, Ps. cvi. 45, besides Is. Ixiii. 7. — With regard to grammatical construction, see ver. 22. 
 
 Ver. 33.— The verb 71Jj;, incUnalum, depressum esse (Piel again in Lam. v. 11) Jeremiah uses in no form.— 'I3v0, see 
 Deut. xvi. 28.— 71^- is Imperf. Piel of 71 J', the Hiph. of which we have in ver. 32. This form occurs only here: it is short- 
 ened from 7ir'1, as !|T", ver. 53, from -IT^V See Olsh., p. 547.— U^^K "'J3, not found in Jeremiah; he says only once 
 DTX ''J3> xxxii. 19. [If he could use this latter phrase "only once," he was not so addicted to it that he could not use the 
 other " only once."— W. II. H.] The phrase, besides here, is found only in Ps. iv. 3 ; xlix. 3 ; Ixii. 10. At the last two places 
 WMi ^33 occurs in the immediate context. 
 
 TT 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Vers. 25-38. The thought underlying this sec- 
 tion is, — the Lord has kind purposes towards the 
 children of men in all circumstances; even if He 
 chastises them, He does it for their good; men 
 should so deport themselves in misfortune that 
 they may ensure the attainment of the Lord's 
 wholesome intention. Then will He permit His 
 mercy to return again. [Here we plainly see 
 the expansion of the assertion made in ver. 20, 
 that l/ie Lord will be mindful of the soul bowed doxvn 
 upon itself in submissive sorrow. — W. H. H.] — 
 The three verses, 25-27, begin with the same 
 word 31£3, good, and evidently belong together, 
 as in this section generally the connection of 
 verses beginning witli the same initial is vei'v 
 apparent. Thus in tlie three following triads, 
 vers. 28-80, 31-33, 34-86, the verses begin not 
 
 only with the same letter, but with homogeneous 
 words. 
 
 Ver. 25. The LORD is good — Good is Je- 
 hovah — unto them that wait for him, — to 
 
 them who trust in Utm. [ Wait, waiting in hope, 
 is the correct idea. — W. H. H.], — to the soul 
 that seeketh him. — The idea of 2M2=good, is 
 presented to us in three aspects in vers. 25--7. 
 Here we have the fundamental idea, tiiat tiio 
 Lord Himself is good. This belongs to His na- 
 ture. He is good even when He causes pain. 
 Man though in trouble, perceiving the goodness 
 of the Lord, cannot defiantly murmur or faint- 
 heartedly despair. He must rather hope even 
 in Him who slays him, seek even Him who seems 
 to thrust him away from Himself. 
 
 Ver. 26. It is good that a man should 
 both hope and quietly wait for the salva- 
 tion of the LORD — Iluppjl '« ^*« who keeping 
 silence waits fur the salvation of Jehovah. [Th« 
 
CHAP. III. 25-33. 
 
 117 
 
 Hebrew construction is difBcult. The authorities 
 differ on important points. But all the transla- 
 tions result in the same essential meaning, which 
 is, on the whole, as well expressed in our com- 
 mon English version, as in any. It is good both 
 hopefully and silently, i. e , unmurmuringly, sub- 
 missively, to loait for the salvation ^f Jehovah. — 
 W. H. H.j From the proposition that the Lord 
 is good to those who wait for Him and seek Him, 
 follows necessarily this other, that the man is 
 fortunate, even in the midst of chastisement, who 
 patiently and silently hopes for the salvation of 
 the Lord. Thence it appears that 3i£0, yood, here 
 is to be taken in the sense of felix, happy, fortu- 
 nate, which it un loubtedly has in iv. 9; Jer. 
 xliv. 17; Is. iii. 10; Ps. cxii. 5. 
 
 [3iC3. The attempt has been made to take 
 this word in verses -6, '11 as a repetition of the 
 statement in ver. 25, tliat Jehovah is good Thus 
 Neumann (see Geulach), Good is Jehovah to those 
 who hope in Hun . . . Good — and who waits . . 
 Good to the man, etc This creates a very harsh 
 ellipsis in ver. 26, and reduces the meaning in 
 ■ver. 27, down to this, that Jehovah is good to 
 that man only who bears the yoke in his youth. 
 Blatney and Boothroyd avoid these two diifi- 
 culties, by translating lip in ver. 25 as a singu- 
 lar noun (which Owei< claims as the correct 
 reading on the authority of the Syr.), and by 
 introducing an illative particle [therefore, hence) 
 in ver. 26, that is not in the Hebrew. BlaynEy: 
 Jehovah is gracious unto him that waiieih for Him 
 . . . He is gracious, therefore let him wait . . . He 
 is gracious unto a man, etc. BoothroyD: Jehovah 
 IS good to him that waiteth for Him . . . He is good, 
 hence let him hope, etc. Besides the grammatical 
 difficulties above stated, these two translations, 
 by making an independent proposition of ver. 
 27, teaches the wretched doctrine that God is 
 necessarily gracious or good to a man who is 
 afflicted in his youth They are, too, open to the 
 grammatical objection that GerlacH brings 
 against Neumann's translation, that it would re- 
 quire the suffix at (he end of verse 26, instead of 
 the name Jehovah. The repetition of the word 
 31£3 in these verses should, doubtless, be regarded 
 merely as a sort of initial rhyme, intended to 
 please the ear and the eye, and to fix the atten- 
 tion. — W H H.] — If 3lt3 is taken in the sense of 
 felix, the following '^^ explains itself It is 
 insufferably har^h to take this as Imperf. Hiph. 
 as many do. Ewald refers to this, § 2o5 a. 
 The examples adduced by him in that place, af- 
 ford no analogy to the case before us Whj' 
 should not i^Q here be construed precisely as it 
 is immediately afterwards in ver 27 ? The 
 double 1 is easily explained, if we take ^Tl' as 
 a verbal adjective from iT}\ as Gesenius [Thes , 
 p 590. comp. 327), Winer, Fcerst and others 
 do, althoUfiLi this adjective does not occur else- 
 where. All objection to this may be urged from 
 Don, which is only found besides here in Is. 
 xlvii. 5, and Hab. ii. 19, where it has an adver- 
 bial signification. But the question is, whether 
 Don is a a pure adverb, or not rather an original 
 
 adjective noun (see D/^X, a forefront, porch). 
 
 EwALD affirms the latter, | 204 b. Comp. I 168 
 g. In this original adjective signification may 
 Don stMiid here. Maurkr. indeed, proposes to 
 take 7''n' and DO'T subsiajitively, bonum est ex- 
 pectare et silere- propr., expectatio et silentium= 
 tacita expectatio. He refers in this connection to 
 
 7''D">. But, as Ewald shows, § 153 a, this for- 
 mation occurs even where it has an abstract 
 sense, as ''3"^ obtreetratio, ri2 totality, yet there 
 is always a passive idea beneath it, as, for ex- 
 ample, retributio originally retribution, disposition 
 
 originally the being disposed. So also vO") was 
 originally obtrectatum, rh2 consummatum. Ac- 
 cording to this tTV would be expectatum. But 
 this sense does not suit here. The connection 
 requires the pure abstract idea of expectatio. 
 
 Therefore we take TIT and DOH in the adjective 
 sense, and the double 1 for as well as, as also, or 
 both — and. [^Both hopeful and silent or submis- 
 sive.] 
 
 Ver. 27. It is good — Good is it — for a man 
 that he bear the yoke in his youth. — If 
 that one is happy, who silently waits and en- 
 dures, then it follows that sorrow itself lias its 
 good side : for it begets that silent endurance. 
 It is the hot fire that ripens that noble fruit. 
 Therefore in the next place the Poet calls bear- 
 ing the yoke something good. He adds, it is 
 true, in hisyouth. This seems to have caused the 
 interpreters difficulty, even in old times. The 
 Aldine edition of the Sept., and thereupon Theo- 
 DOTiON, translated £/c veorrfTOC ahrov, from his 
 youth. And in fact many Codices read V">?>'50, 
 from his youth. But the idea of youth is not to 
 be taken in too restricted a sense. By it the Poet 
 would indicate evidently, not youth in opposition 
 to manhood, but the period of still fresh unbroken 
 strength, in opposition to the period of broken 
 and diminished vitality. He would then under- 
 stand manhood as included in youth. He would 
 not exclude the thought that it may be whole- 
 some, in a certain sense, for the old to bear the 
 yoke. He means only that the time of vigorous 
 strength is especially the time when bearing the 
 yoke may be of advantage. For then a man is 
 pre-eminently pliable. Then can he learn, in 
 the school of the cross, things that will be of the 
 greatest use to him in his later life. [Calvin 
 understands the yoke as that of instruction, in- 
 stead of chastisement ; submission to the teacher. 
 So the Chaldee paraphrases explain it. But the 
 whole context requires us to understand the yoke 
 of affliction and submission to Divine Providence. 
 See especially the following verses, 28-33. — W. 
 H. H.] 
 
 J. D. Michaelis has concluded from this verse, 
 that Jeremiah wrote it when a young man. It 
 seems to me that there is some truth at the 
 foundation of this remark. In this third chap- 
 ter the person of the speaker stands out in the 
 foreground. In the connection of this chapter, 
 then, this expression can certainly be better un- 
 derstood in the mouth of a man in the vigor of 
 his strength, than in the mouth of an old man. 
 Since then Jeremiah, at the time of the captuie 
 
J18 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 of Jerusalem, stood at the very least on the thresh- 
 old of old age, having a ministry of forty-two 
 years behind him, which he had begun rather 
 after, than before, or at his twentieth year (see 
 Introduction to Jer. Proph., p. xiii.), therefore this 
 place is rather against than for Jeremiah's au- 
 thorship of this Song. [Is it natural for a young 
 man to talk about patiently and silently bearing 
 a yoke? Is it not natural fur an old man. look- 
 ing back upon a long experience, to recognize 
 the benefit of early crosses and afflictions ? Could 
 we imagine anything more likely to be said by 
 the pious Prophet in his old age, than what is 
 here said? And is it not just what his personal 
 sufferings that begun in his youth long before 
 Jerusalem was destroyed, would have led him to 
 say? And, finally, do we not recognize every- 
 where inthese Lamentations, the spirit of one who 
 has been long a stranger to happiness, who, — un- 
 like the young man, strong, sanguine and self- 
 reliant, — has lost all hope save a hope in God, 
 looking far onwards into the hidden future, that 
 is to be ivaitedfor in silent passive, submission? — 
 Wordsworth : " The sentiment before us is very 
 appropriate to Jeremiah, who had been chastened 
 in early life by God, and had thus learnt a les- 
 son of patience and cheerful resignation under 
 the severest personal afflictions; and he here 
 recognizes th« benefit of that early discipline." 
 — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 28. He sitteth alone and keepeth 
 silent. — The bearing of the yoke i.'* not uncon- 
 ditionally wholesome for a man, but only when 
 it is done in the right way. That is no right 
 and wholesome way of bearing the cross, when 
 one is impatient and perverse, and desires to 
 shake off the yoke. Rather, the yoke should be 
 borne in silent and patient submission. — The 
 silting alone is in opposition to cheerful inter- 
 course with men. Tliis Jeremiah himself makes 
 explicitly ^jonspicuous, when he says, xv. 17, "I 
 sat not in the assembly of the joyful [E. V., the 
 mockers'^, nor rejoiced ; I sat alone, because of 
 Thy hand : for Thou hast filled me with indigna- 
 tion." Only in silence and solitude do Divine 
 chastisements affect the heart. Whoever permits 
 himself to be diverted by the noise of the world, 
 drowns the voice of God, which speaks to our 
 heart by means of the yoke. Compare, besides, 
 i. 1 ; Lev. xiii. 46. — And is silent: comp ii. 10, 
 18 ; Jer. xlvii. 6 ; xlviii. 2. — Because he hath 
 borne it upon him, — when [because^ Heimposcd 
 it on him. The old translators (Sept., Jerome, 
 Syri.\c) have taken the verb in the sense of taking 
 upon ones self [so E. V., Calvin and Owen], be- 
 cause they thought, the subject being wanting, 
 the subject of the immediately preceding verbs 
 
 must be supplied. But the Hebrew verb (7DJ, 
 
 as also 7l£D) means tollere, imponere [/o lay upon, 
 to impose']. The whole context readily supplies 
 Jehovah as the subject, and the word itself gives 
 the object. [Brougiiton, Henderson, Noyks 
 and GiRN.vcH, all agree with N.\K(1elsbach, in 
 taking ihe verb in an active sense, and in making 
 God the subject of the verb, — hecaii.ic, or when lie 
 laid it upon him. Calvin, evidently dissatisfied 
 with his own rendering, confesses that the ex.- 
 pression does not seem natural to him. and sug 
 gesls another reading. Noyes remarks that 
 
 " the name of God is understood, as often in 
 Job," and refers to his note on Job iii. 20 — W. 
 H. H.] 
 
 [Luther, Pareau, De Wette, Maurer, The- 
 Nius and Noyes, make vers. 28-30 dependent on 
 "3, that, in verse 27, and expository of the mean- 
 ing of hearing the yoke. It is good that a man bear 
 the yoke in his youth, that he sit alone and is silent, 
 etc., that he put his mouth in the dust, etc., that he 
 give his cheek to him that smiteth him, etc. This 
 gives a good sense ; but the emphatic idea in 
 ver. 27, is, — not that a man bear the yoke, but 
 that he bear it in his youth; it is hardly possible, 
 therefore, that vers. 28-30 can be an expansion 
 of ver. 27, without showing why it is good for a 
 man to bear the yoke in his youth. We are com- 
 pelled, therefore, to interpret vers. 28-30, inde- 
 pendently of ver. 27.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 29. He putteth his mouth in the 
 dust. — This expression is found only here. It 
 is different from the expression lick the dust (Ps. 
 Ixxii. 9; Mic. vii. 17; Is. xlix. 23). For whilst 
 the latter denotes only the lowest degree of sub- 
 jection, the former denotes likewise speechless- 
 ness, since he who has put his mouth in the dust 
 cannot speak. Yet it is not meant that he who is 
 humbled in the dust cannot say anything at all. 
 Only he shall restrain himself from murmuring. 
 Ejaculations of humble imploring prayer may 
 be extorted from the heart. As such an ejacu- 
 lation we must regard the words — if so be there 
 may be hope, — perhaps there is hope. For if 
 we take these as the words of the Poet, then we 
 cannot understand why they occur just here. 
 They would in that case stand as well or better 
 at the end of ver. 80, in place of he is filled full 
 with reproach. Here at the close of ver. 29, they 
 are only in place, if they can be brought into 
 organic union with the first member of the verse. 
 This is done if we take them as what the hum- 
 bled one is permitted to say, or rather to think, 
 in spite of his putting his mouth in the dust. I 
 do not on this account think, that we should sup- 
 ply "^OnS, saying, for it would illy suit to say — 
 he becomes dumb speaking. We must, there- 
 fore, understand the sentence, as indeed a decla- 
 ration of the humbled one, but as an independent 
 exclamation, not grammatically connected with 
 the preceding sentence. 
 
 Ver. 30. If the three propositions, vers. 28-30, 
 be compared one with another, a certain grada- 
 tion will be perceived. For sitting alone and 
 silent is comparatively easy. To put the mouth 
 in the dust and yet to hope, is more difficult. 
 But the hardest of all, without question, is to 
 present the cheek to the smiter and patiently ac- 
 cept the full measure of disgrace that is to come 
 upon us.— He giveth — offers— 'hia cheek to 
 him that smiteth him. — By him that unite fh 
 him we are not, to understand, exclusively and 
 immediately, God. For God smites not immedi- 
 ately, but by the instruiaentality of men. "The 
 Lord hath bidden him," said David in reference 
 to the revilings of Shimei (2 Sam. xvi. 11). For 
 the sense, see Job xvi. 10; Matt. v. 39. [Cal- 
 vin: " There are many who submit to God when 
 they perceive His hand; as, for instance, when 
 any one is afflicted with a disease, he knows that 
 it is a chastisement that proceeds froir God ; 
 
CHAP. III. 34-39. 
 
 119 
 
 when pestilence happens, or famine, from the 
 inclemency of the weather, the hand of God ap- 
 pears to them; and many then conduct them- 
 Belves in a suitable manner : but when an enemy 
 meets one, and when injured, he instantly says, 
 'I have now nothing to do with God, but thut 
 wicked enemy treats me disgracefully.' It is 
 then for this reason that the Prophet shows that 
 the patience of the godly ought to extend to in- 
 juries of this kind."] — He is filled full •with 
 reproach. — [Calvin: " Thore are two kinds 
 of injuries; for the wicked either treat us with 
 violence, or assail us with reproaches ; and re- 
 proach is the bitterest of all things, and inflicts 
 a most grievous wound on all ingenuous minds."] 
 
 Vers. 31-33. The triad now following states 
 the reason why it is good not to despair in 
 trouble, but to persevere in silent hope. The 
 reason is contained in three specifications ; or, 
 more correctly, in two, the second of which is 
 shown in two particulars. 
 
 Ver. 31. The first reason is a negative one. For 
 the Lord [Adonai, not Jehovah. Yet see Infr., 
 Add. Rem., p. 32,] will not cast off for ever. 
 — The same expression as Ps. Ixxvii. 8; comp. 
 xliv. 24; Ixxiv. 1. Calvin: "It is certain there 
 will be no patience, except there be hope . . . 
 As patience cherishes hope, so hope is the founda- 
 tion of patience; and hence consolation is, ac- 
 
 cording to Paul, connected with patience ;, Rom. 
 XV. 4."] 
 
 Ver. 32. The second reason contains two par- 
 ticulars. The first is a positive one: the com- 
 passion of God after He has a long time smitten, 
 will yet appear again. But though he cause 
 grief, yet will he have compassion ac- 
 cording to the multitude of his mercies. — 
 Foi- if Be has ajjiicted, then in He moved to compas- 
 sion according to His great mercy. With regard to 
 the meaning, see Hos. vi. 1 , Job v. 18; Ps. xxx. 
 6 (5). [See also Is. liv. 7, 8; Ps. Ixxxix. 32-o4.] 
 
 Ver. 33. The second particular of the second 
 reason is expressed in a negative form: God 
 must, after He has smitten, have compassion 
 again, because chastisement is not with Him an 
 end, but a means. The essential disposition of 
 His heart is love. Therefore chastisement is not 
 the proper or true expression of His feeling to- 
 wards us. For he doth not afflict w^illingly 
 [marg., from his heart], nor grieve — i/et lie 
 grieves \_and grieve. — W. H. H.] the children 
 of men. — Frorn the heart: Not out of His heart, 
 but if we may be allowed to speak of God anthro- 
 popathically, chastisement comes from His head. 
 The antithesis indicated here is not expressed in 
 the context [willingly, see Num. xvi. 28], For 
 the sense, see Ps. cxix. 75 ; Jer. xxxii. 41 ; Deut. 
 xxviii. 63. 
 
 III. 34-39. 
 
 34, 35 To crush under his feet all the prisoners of the earth. To turn aside the 
 
 36 right of a man before the face of the Most High. To subvert a man in his cause, 
 
 37 the Lord approveth not. Who is he that saith, and it cometh to pass, when the 
 
 38 Lord commandeth it not ? Out of the mouth of the Most High proceedeth not 
 
 39 evil and good ? Wherefore doth a living man complain, a man for the punishment 
 of his sins ? 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Vers. 34-36. — The three infinitives which begin these verses, can only depend on HNT- But HXI in connection with 
 vK or Sy has the meaning of intueri in aliquid, fixing the eyes on something (Is. xvii. 7 ; Ex. v. 21). Owing to the affinity 
 
 between Sn, /V and 7 (See Ew., § 217, c, d, i), 7 HNT can be used for 7X HNI- So Ps. Ixiv. 6, and here [Gerlach refers 
 
 ■■ - : ■ : T T ] •• T T 
 
 also to 1 Sam. xvi. 7]. The necessity of choosing a word beginning with 7, on account of the alphabetical arrangement, has 
 
 here at any rate decidedly prevailed. [Neumann, according to Gerlach, makes these infinitives dependent on X7 of ver. 33, 
 God does not willingly allow all that Israel suffei's ; but this involves great difficulty in interpreting last clauses of vers. 35, 
 36.— W. H. H.] , 
 
 Ver. 34. — X3T does not occur in the Kal, Jeremiah uses it once in the Pual, xliv. 10. — The suffix in V7JI (the peculiar 
 TT 1 T :- 
 
 opinion of Otto, who takes it as synonymous with '' 'JB/j we dismiss), can only be referred to the subject concealed in 
 
 J{3n. Use the Participle instead of the Infinitive, and the reference is instantly plain. — TDX Jeremiah never uses. 
 
 TT ■ T 
 
 Ver. 35. — The phrase '3 t03LJ'O HtSn never occurs in Jeremiah. [Yet he was most familiar with it, especially in hi» 
 
 favorite book of Deuteronomy. — W. II. II. J He uses n£3n many times in another sense, v. 25; vi. 12; vii. 24, etc. — • 
 
 T33~Di32'D, comp. D'JVJK £3DEy?0, Jer. v. 2s.— |V7j^ as a name of God, not in Jeremiah; he uses the word only twice, 
 
 in a local sense xx. 2 ; xxxvi. 10. [.See Inlr., Add. Rem. p. 32.] 
 
 Ver. 36. H-iy, oi'l.V I'iel, Pual and Hithp., occur. The word does not occur at all in Jeremiah. In Lamentations the 
 
 substantive HPH't ver. 59, is also found. — 3^T, Jer. xv. 10 ; xxv. 31, etc. — The construction ij''13 DHX DH' seems to be 
 
 T T- • • : T T • — 
 
 chosen to vary the phrase from ver. 35 ; for elsewhere we find only t^DU^O T\^^ (Job viii. 3 ; xxxiv. 12), pli' (Job viii. ?>), 
 or 1-3 'ITTl (Ps. cxlvi. 9). 
 
 Ver. 37. — [^PIPI. Naegelsbach in his Grammar refers to a similar use of 3d Pers. Fern. Sing, of verb in Jud. x. 9 ; 1 Sam. 
 xxx. 6, "'S lypl ;' Jer. vii. 31 ; xix. 5, 'SS-Sj; nnSj? ; Jer. xliv. 21, 'laS-SjT n"^>'P1 ; and Jo.sh. xi. 20; 2 Kings xxiv. 
 3, nirn The last two examples show Ihat Owen is wrong when he says that this verb is "probably always masculine, 
 when it has this meaning," and should, tlierefore, be taken here as second person masculine. — W. H. H.] 
 
120 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 Ver. 38. — I do not think that ver. 38 depends on "lOX in ver. 37, as Luther translates, Who then may say, that such a 
 
 -T 
 
 thing is done without the Lord's command, and that neither evil nor good comes out of the mouth of the Most High ? For TOX 
 
 ~ T 
 
 >n ver. 37 is not merely to say, but it involves here the abstract idea of command, which does not need an object following 
 after it, in order to define it. But ver. 38 must be taken independently as a question. See Exeg. notes below on ver. 36. — 
 DVn, .Ter. xliv. 9. . 
 
 Ver. 39. — Tl DIN reminds us of the grammatical construction of T\ 7X, Ps. xlii. 3; Ixxxiv. 3; 2 Kings xix.4, 16. 
 
 T T — .. 
 
 Jeremiah uses the adjective T) only in tlie formula of an oath, >■" ^H ', or, JJ5 Tl, iv. 2 ; v. 2 ; xii. 16, etc. : in xxxviii. 2, 
 Vt seems to be a verb, — see at that place. — {<£jn, see i. 8 ; Jeremiah uses neither in the bingular nor in the plural. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Vers. 34-39. We have already, at ver. 30, dis- 
 criminated between an indirect and an immediate 
 chustiseraeni. It is there left undecided, which 
 may be intended. But this point remaining 
 uncertain must now be made plain. All the 
 grounds of consolation, brought together in what 
 precedes, must be acknowledged as valid and 
 substantial. But they apply only to such sor- 
 rows as those of which God is esteemed the im- 
 mediate author. But how is it with those sor- 
 rows which the malice of men inflict upon us? 
 The opinion might arise, that these evils befall us 
 without the intervention of God, and that He 
 takes no notice of them. Yet these evils are 
 very numerous ; and what consolation can be 
 afforded against these evils from wliat is said in 
 vers. 25-33, to those who are suffering under the 
 hand of God ? To this question it is now ex- 
 plicitly answered, in vers. 37, 38, that nothing 
 in the world is done without God's will, that no 
 man has the power to act with absolute creative 
 independence, that both good and bad fortune 
 depend on the will of the Lord. Consequently 
 there is no reason for sighing despairingly over 
 any calamity, whatever it may be. There is no 
 absolute misfortune — except sin ! All sorrow of 
 the heart then concentrates itself on the source 
 of evil, on wickedness. 
 
 Ver. 34. To crush — to trample — under his 
 feet. — The pronoun /us must refer to the subject 
 of the infiuilive to crush. [Owen absurdly refers 
 it to man in the last verse, where the last words 
 literally are children of man. — W. H. H.] All 
 the prisoners of the earth. — This cannot 
 mean literally all the prisoners on the whole 
 earth. This is evident from the use of the verb to 
 see (HXI), ver. 3b, in the perfect tense. The 
 
 *■ TT ^ 
 
 Poet can only have in his eye real, concrete cir- 
 cumstances. Only those prisoners can be in- 
 tended, already spoken of above, i. 3, 5, 18. 
 yx, earth, [improperly translated land, by Blay- 
 NEY, BooTHROYD and Henderson] is not against 
 this; see Ps. xliv. 4; xxxvii. 3. Delitzsch at 
 this place, Gesen. Thes., p. 154. [Blayney's 
 arguments that the prisoners intended are those 
 held and enslaved for debt, could satisfy no one 
 but himself.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 35. To turn aside the right of a 
 man — to bend the ru/ht of a man \_i. e., to deprive 
 a man of his legal rights. — W. 11. H.]. See Ex. 
 xxiii. 6; Deut. xvi. 19; xxiv. 17; xxvii. 19; 1 
 Sam. viii. 3 ; cunip. I'rov. xvii. 23 ; xviii. 5 ; Is. 
 X. 2. — Before the face of the Most High. — 
 The auilior thinks hereof the omnipresent and 
 omni:^cieut Goil, who enthroned on high looks 
 far down on Heaven and earth (I's. cxiii. 5, 6). 
 
 [Blayney translates |V7^ {the Most High) here a 
 superior • asserting that it cannot refer to God, 
 because no one can wrest judgment where He is 
 the Judge. The meaning evidently is, however, 
 to pervert judgment at earthly tribunals, though 
 this is done, as it were, before the very face of the 
 Most Iliyh, who sees all things and is present 
 everywhere. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 36. To subvert. — The word means to bend, 
 to bend down, and is used both in reference to 
 persons ( Job xix. 6 ; Ps. cxix. 78 ; Eccl. vii. 13), 
 and things (Am. viii. 5; Job viii. 3, etc.). A 
 man in his cause — in his laio-suit. The Lord 
 approveth (marg., seeth) not. Has not the Lord 
 seen that? In this sentence the significaiion of 
 the verb and the form of the proposition are 
 doubtful. As regards the meaning of the verb 
 riNI, I do not believe it can be taken in the sense 
 
 T T 
 
 of choosing, preferring (see Gen. xli. 33 ; Deut. 
 xii. 13; 2 Sam. xxiv. 13) ; or in a sense derived 
 from that meiiiiing, agreeing to, allowing (Ewald). 
 For where HXI has the meaning oi choosing, there 
 are always a number of objects placed before the 
 sight, among which the subject, after looking 
 round by way of examination, makes his choice. 
 But it cannot be said that where God permits the 
 injustice done by men. He has positively chosen it. 
 [The learned and sagacious commentator, in the 
 heat of his argument, has made a singular blun- 
 der. The proposition is not necessarily a ques- 
 tion, involving an affirmative answer, but may be 
 a direct affirmation, that God does not approve, 
 choose, or look with favor on such injustice 
 
 (nX"1 nS).— W. H. H.] Further, this sense would 
 not suit the construction of the infinitive with 
 ^ depending on HXT (see Gram, note, vers. 34- 
 36, above). We are obliged then to take this 
 verb in its natural, original sense oi seeing. But 
 in that case it is clear that the proposition must 
 be taken as a question, as in verse 38. For it 
 were a contradiction to say, the perverting of 
 the right bifore the face of the Most High, the Lord 
 does not see. What is done before the face of the 
 Lord, He cannot fail to see. This is the very 
 basis of the argument. If there were anything 
 which the Lord doth not see, we might allow that 
 that particular thing was done without His con- 
 sent. But since He sees everything, then must 
 everything that is done, be done with His con- 
 sent. The absence of the interrogation is no 
 inore remarkable than at ver. 38. See for ex- 
 ample Job ii. 10, my Gr., § 107, 1. The perfect 
 form of the verb, PINT, shows that the Poet had 
 
 T T 
 
 here especially in mind the oppression that had 
 befallen Israel and the Prophet. He would say, 
 Must not the Lord have seen all the misery which 
 the Israelites had suffered as captives, or by the 
 
CHAP. III. 34-39. 
 
 121 
 
 injustice of the mighty, all the misery especially 
 which had extorted from the Poet the foregoing 
 lamentation ? If he had had in his eye, not the 
 concrete and actual, but merely general and 
 possible facts, he would, without doubt, have used 
 nx^', as BoTTCHER has remarked. See below 
 xiji, ver. 38. [The English version, the Lord 
 approveth not ; or as BEOuaHTON has it, the Lord 
 Liketh not, is undoubtedly correct, and is adopted 
 by Blayn ey (who translates the verb seeth not, but 
 explains it in the sense of not approving), Booth- 
 EOYD, Henderson and Wordsworth. It avoids 
 the harsh and arbitrary explanation of supposing 
 vers. 34-36, the language of an objector, who 
 affirms the Lord doth not regard these acts of op- 
 pression and injustice, as Calvin and Owen sug- 
 gest. It also avoids the equally arbitrary as- 
 sumption of Naeoelsbach, Gerlach and Noyes, 
 that these words are put interrogatively. There 
 is nothing in the form or context to suggest a 
 question. Ver. 38 is no parallel to this case : 
 for there the question is suggested by the ques- 
 tion that precedes and the question that follows 
 it: the whole triplet is in the interrogative style. 
 It is dangerous to allow the right to assume an 
 interrogation for the sake of surmounting a dif- 
 ficulty. Were this license generally accepted, 
 the Bible could be made to teach the very reverse 
 of what it does teach, by assuming that its posi- 
 tive affirmations, are interrogations emphasizing 
 the contradiction of what is apparently asserted. 
 The opinion that HXI means to view with pleasure, 
 preference or approbation, only when followed by 
 the preposition 3, has been so generally accepted, 
 that Dr. J. A. Alexander hesitated to give HXI 
 
 1 TT 
 
 followed by / that meaning in Is. liii. 2. Yet 
 
 only that meaning suits that passage: and in 1 
 
 Sam. xvi. 7, we have nx'l with 7 twice in this 
 T T : 
 
 exact meaning of regarding with pleasure, with 
 favor, with approbation, — " man looketh on the 
 outward appearance, but Jehovah looketh on the 
 heart." It will be found on examination of those 
 passages where HNT is construed with 3, that 
 the preposition intensifies the sense and seems 
 to denote looking steadfastly at a thing, feasting the 
 eyes upon it witii inward delight, or with exulta- 
 tion as over a prostrate foe. But HNI without 
 3, is also used to express the idea of looking at a 
 thing with indulgence and allotoance, where no 
 special compbicency is implied. It is thus used 
 here, and in exactly the same sense that it has 
 in Hab. i. 13, " Thou art of purer eyes than to 
 behold evil," V"^ rillD. Wordsworth: "The 
 sense is, — For a man to crush under his feet all 
 the captives of the earth (as the Chaldeans 
 crushed indiscriminately their Hebrew captives, 
 without regard to sex or age), to pervert a man's 
 cause in the face of the Most High, to subvert a 
 man in his cause — this the Lord does not look on 
 with approval. For He is of purer eyes than to 
 behold iniquity." — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 37. Who is he that saith, and it 
 Cometh to pass, ^rhen the Lord com- 
 mandeth it not ? — Who is he that spoke and it 
 teas done, unless the Lord commanded i/? [Noyes: 
 " Who is he that can command anything to be 
 done, so that it shall be efl'ected, unless Jehovah 
 
 permit or order it to be done ?"] This verse 
 affords the proof that the evils, enumerated in 
 vers. 34-36, had not befallen those who sufi"ered 
 them, without God's consent. This verse re- 
 minds us that there is only one single absolute 
 creative causality ; for the words TIPI "^OK [^« 
 said — and there was] do, without doubt, refer to 
 the creative-word (Gen. i. 3, etc.). Were there 
 a man of whom it could be said, — Be spake and it 
 was done, He commanded and it stood fast (Ps. 
 xxxiii. 9), then it might be possible that those 
 evils had befallen Israel at his command, and not 
 Jehovah's. Evidently the Poet has in mind tbese 
 words just quoted from Ps. xxxiii. 9, although 
 he quotes from memory as appears from the sub- 
 stitution of ''i^P^l for ■'nil. But see the femin. in 
 such cases, my Gr., | 60, 6 6 [see Gram, nqtt 
 above']. The second clause of ver. 37 is evidently 
 suggested by the second clause of Ps. xxxiii. 9, 
 only it is changed into a negative sentence, 
 which serves likewise to define the implied nega- 
 tive of the first clause. There are some, indeed, 
 in reference to whom the expression 'HPl "ll?** 
 \he spoke and it came to pass] might in a certain 
 sense be used, but only when the Lord has also 
 commanded what is done. There is no one 
 whose will is efficient without the consent and 
 command of the Lord. The explanation. Who 
 then may say, that such a thing is done without the 
 Lord's command? (Ldther, IIosenmdeller and 
 others), is ungrammatical. It ignores the Im- 
 perfect with Wav consecut. [The thought is the 
 same as in Amos iii. 6, Shall there be evil in a city, 
 and the LORD hath not done it? — Owen gives an 
 entirely new version. Who is he who says. That 
 Thou art Lord who dost not command? This is on 
 the assumption that vers. 34-38 contain the senti- 
 ments of an objector, whose argument now is, in 
 vers. 37, 38, "that God as a Lord or Sovereign 
 does not command or order events, and for this 
 reason, because both evil and good cannot come 
 from Him." This interpretation, harsh, difficult 
 and against authority, could only be accepted in 
 
 case nxi K7, ver. 36, must mean does not see, 
 regard or observe, and not does not approve, (see 
 notes, ver. 36). and also in case ^"il^r}]^ in this 
 verse, must be rendered as 2d person masculine, 
 and not 3d person feminine (see Gram, note 
 above). — The connection of this triplet with the 
 preceding one, according to Dr. Naegelsbach's 
 interpretation of ver. 36, — has not the Lord seen 
 that? — is very obvious. But it is no objection to 
 the other interpretation — the Lord does not ap- 
 prove, that these three verses recognize God's 
 agency in the evils that befall men. It is the 
 problem constantly recurring in the Bible, that 
 God does not approve of oppression and injustice, 
 and yet God makes sin the punishment of sin. 
 No one can sinfully injure bis neighbor with 
 God's approbation: and yet the injury he does 
 is God's providential chastisement of transgres- 
 sors.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 38. Out of the mouth of the Most 
 High proceedeth not evil and good? — Goes 
 not out of t/if mouth of the Most High the evil and 
 the good? If there is no one who is able to make 
 his will efficient without God's permission, then 
 follows necessarily the general proposition, that 
 
122 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 everything, as well evil as good, proceeds from 
 the mouth of God, i. e., is done by God's com- 
 mand. It certainly is not the Poet's intention 
 here to suggest any reflections on the origin of 
 moral evil. He has in his eye, according to the 
 whole context, only the contrast of prosperity 
 and adversity. By the evil he means physical 
 evil or misfortune, and by the good — physical 
 good or happiness. And although misfortune is 
 frequently a consequence of moral evil, according 
 to vers. 34-36, yet lie regards this consequence 
 onlj' with reference to its bearing on human wel- 
 fare, and not with reference to its causation. 
 What he wishes to say is, that the Lord permits 
 wrong and violence, as well as those actions that 
 tend to piomote happiness, in order, according 
 as His purpose may be, to chastise or to bless. 
 But he did not intend to say that God had posi- 
 tively willed what is evil, although the significa- 
 tion of evil is not exhausted in the idea of 
 chastisement. 
 
 Ver. 39. Since happiness and misfortune are 
 both equally willed of God, both must be good, 
 and notliing belonging to eitlier of them should 
 cause us to murmur. As a man who has brought 
 upon himself wholesome sickness by means of 
 bitter medicine, ought not to complain of that 
 medicine, but should blame himself for having 
 caused the necessity of using it, so a man should 
 not complain of the evils which befall him, for 
 these are only the necessary means of curing the 
 sickness of sin, of which he himself is guilty. 
 If he will lament, let him lament for his sin. See 
 Jer. XXX. 15. — Wherefore doth a living man 
 complain (marg., 7nurmur). — -For what sighs the 
 man who lives? The verb, jJINj^n, is respirare, 
 gemere, to sigh with the kindred idea of murmur- 
 ing. Num. xi. 1. which is the only place except 
 this, where the word occurs. The expression a 
 living man, 'PI DIN, is difficult. It cannot be 
 taken, with Pakeau and Rosenmueller, as 
 synonymous with DIN, a man, in which case ''H. 
 living, would be, properly speaking, superfluous. 
 Neither can it be taken for W^V\, vita, life, in 
 which case the sense would be eiir queritur homo 
 vitam scil. calamitosam (Maurer) [why complains 
 man of life, i. e., because it is calamitous] ? As 
 little can it be called as long as he lives (J. D. 
 Michaelis); ov, although he lives, since he yet 
 lives and could do something better than sigh 
 (Ewald). The only sense corresponding to the 
 context is, what does the man as a living one sigh 
 for? As a living one, i. e., as one who still finds 
 himself in this life's school of discipline. How 
 should we in the time appointed for affliction 
 mourn over our alBictions ? A living man should 
 not allow himself to be surprised by " the fiery 
 trial " as if thereby some strange thing happened 
 unto him (1 Peter iv. 12) : only that happens to 
 him which is natural and inevitable. A man 
 for the punishment of his sins ? — Evcrg one 
 on account of his sins. This can only be the an- 
 swer to the question proposed in tlie first member 
 of the verse, designed to rectify the evil in view, 
 — not sufferings, but sins should be lamented. 
 
 [The difficulties of this verse are great, as is 
 evident from the variety of translations and in- 
 terpretations it has suffered. Four questions are 
 to be answered. 1. The meaning of the verb 
 
 rendered C07nplain or murmur? 2. The force of 
 ■'n, living? 3. The sense in which a ?na7i, 13J, 
 of the second member of the verse is to be taken? 
 4. Whether the whole verse composes one ques- 
 tion, or includes a question and a responsive ex- 
 hortation or a question and a simple answer? — 1, 
 The meaning of the verb J JiN't"}" ? Aben Ezra 
 derived it from |^X, and rendered it by "^Pp, to 
 lie (see Calvin, Fuerst, Gerlach). Hence 
 Muenster, taking ver. 38 as a denial of Divine 
 Providence, explains ver. 39 thus : bhnphema 
 hxc vox est '■mentiturque homo in peccatis suis,' — 
 this is a blasphemous saying ' and man is a liar 
 in his si7is ' (Gerlach). Isaaki derived the verb 
 from njX (Fuerst). From this root possibly, by 
 some far-fetched analogy, Broughton brought 
 his unique traijslation, which has the sole merit 
 of relieving us of the difficulty of explaining a 
 living man, 'F) D1?s, and a man, 1I3J, by making 
 one the subject, and the other the object of the 
 verb, — tvhat should living man grudge any person 
 after his sin? But what this means the learned 
 Hebraist has not explained. Calvin is very 
 positive that the word here and in Numbers, 
 means to weary one^e self. " Why should he weary 
 himself, a living man, and a man in his sins? for as 
 long as men thus remain in their own dregs, they 
 will never acknowledge God as the judge of the 
 world, and thus they always go astray through 
 their own perverse imaginations." Others ren- 
 der it in a similar sense: ^^ Why doth he afflict 
 himself by his sins? Why doth he procure evils 
 to himself by the committing of sin?" — " Why 
 doth he vex himself? (to wit, by impatient car- 
 riage under God's hand), even a man in his sin, 
 persisting still in the same" (see Gataker). 
 The Versions and Lexicograpliers, however, with 
 great unanimity, and apparent reason, derive 
 the verb from jJX, to breathe hard, to sigh, and 
 take it in the sense oi murmuring, complaining, as 
 above. There is no room to doubt that this is 
 its meaning. 2. What is the force of "'n. Pareau 
 and Rosenmueller, deny that this word is em- 
 phatic. They claim that ^n, alone, is used for 
 man, referring to Ps. cxliii. 2, and regard DIN, 
 
 ' ° ' ° TT 
 
 added here, as a mere redundancy of language 
 by Jeremiah, who was not chary of words, ver- 
 borum non parcior. We are then to take the ex- 
 pression living man, as meaning simply a man, as 
 we often say living man, or mortal man where the 
 adjective is superfluous : (Rosenmueller trans- 
 lates the text simply mortalis.) To this we 
 answer 1. The word ''n in Ps. cxliii. 2, is em- 
 phatic: — None living, i. e., no living man is just, 
 or innocent in God's sight. The inference may 
 be allowed, possibly intended, that those not «ow 
 living may have passed into a state of innocency 
 in God's sight. 2. The position of the word 
 after DIN (reminding us, as Naegelsbach says, 
 
 of ''n ^N, see gram, note above) and also the 
 accent it bears* show that the word is emphatic. 
 In this case it is difficult to assign any other 
 
 *OwEN, in utter violation of the accents, connects 'n with. 
 T3J, and translates. 
 
 Why complain should mun, 
 Any man alive, for liis ■'i;! ? 
 
CHAP. III. 34-39. 
 
 123 
 
 meaning to it, than that which Ewald and most 
 
 commentators do, why sighs man living, i. e., since 
 he lives. Dr. Naegklsbach says it cannot have 
 this meaning: but he gives no reason why it 
 cannot : and his own translation involves this 
 sense, {what does a man sigh for who lives, der lebt?) 
 while his explanation in the commentary, man as 
 a living one [als ein Lebender), "«. e., as one who 
 still finds himself in this life's school of dis- 
 cipline," adds to the original, and what he calls 
 impossible idea, of one who yet lives, another and 
 fanciful notion of his own. Michaelis, Ewald, 
 Gerlach, Blayney, Boothroy^d, Henderson 
 and Noyes, all agree in the sense which our 
 English Version seems to suggest, which Words- 
 worth also adopts and explains thus: "Where- 
 fore does a man, whose life is still spared by 
 God's mercy, and to whom, therefore, the door 
 of repentance and pardon is not yet closed, mur- 
 mur (see Num. xi. 1, where the same word, 
 literally signifying to breathe hard, is used), in- 
 stead of using his breath and life in order to pray 
 for forgiveness, and to amend his practice ?"' 
 3. In what sense are we to take ^3J, a man, in 
 the second member of the verse? While mx 
 
 T T 
 
 is the generic name for man in the widest 
 sense, "ipj is supposed to be a more distinctive 
 and honorable designation, as implying a man 
 possessed of manly qualities. Some suppose 
 that it is used emphatically here in this sense, 
 as Blayney suggests. Since most languages 
 have a variety of words signifying man, most 
 of the Versions render DIN of the first mem- 
 
 TT 
 
 ber, and ^3J of the second, by terms of cor- 
 responding significance, as if intending to ex- 
 press an emphasis in the last term, — av&puirog, 
 avf/p ; homo, vir; Mensch, Mann, — a distinction 
 that seems to be aimed at in English in a 
 version given by Gataker, Why should a 
 living wight complain, or murmur, any 7nan for his 
 sin ? This distinction, if intended, would give 
 a good sense. Why should a living man, a truly 
 manly man murmur at the punishment of his sins? 
 The Arabic gives the following sense: He who 
 dissolves himself in lamentations and sighs, is a iveak 
 man; the strong man is ashamed of his sins {Prediger- 
 Bible). Corn. Van Waenen, according to Rosen- 
 mueller, inferred from the Arabic that 'n has 
 the sense of being affected with shame, and joining 
 it to 13il in spite of the strong disjunctive accent, 
 translated thus: Why does the mean man [homo 
 vilis) dissolve himself in lamentations? The noble 
 man [vir nobilis) will restrain himself for shame on 
 account of his crimes. But there are no proofs or 
 analogies for this strongly contrasted use of 
 DnN and "131 We can, however, take "^JJ here, 
 
 T T 
 
 as Dr. Naegelsbach does, in a sense thatC'"'X often 
 has, of every one, each man individually consid- 
 ered. See Joel ii. 8; Jer. xvii. 5, 7; Jos. vii. 14, 17, 
 18; 1 Chron. xxiii. 3. There are many other pas- 
 sages where the word may be rendered every man 
 or every one. Gesenius gives it this meaning in 
 our text. This rendering prevents the necessity 
 of breaking up the verse into two separate and 
 distinct members. 4. Does the whole verse in- 
 clude a single question? Many versions take 
 the first member as a question, and the second 
 
 as a responsive exhortation. So the old Geneva, 
 
 which Noyes adopts : Wherefore then murmureth 
 the living man? Let him murmur at his own sins! 
 Gerlach's objections to this are well taken. 
 The antithesis would then require that in the 
 question some cause of murmuring should be 
 stated, which the prophet would indicate as an 
 improper one ; as, 'Wiierefore murmureth living 
 man on account of his misfortunes ? Let him mur- 
 mur on account of his sins.' It may be said that 
 the cause may easily be inferred from the con- 
 text. Still it would seem strange that such an 
 important antithesis was not distinctly expressed. 
 Besides, this rendering makes it necessary, not 
 only to repeat the verb contained in the first 
 member and not expressed in the second, but to 
 change it from the Indicative mood to the Imper- 
 ative, why does he murmur, let him murmur. These 
 difiiculties are overcome by taking tlie verse as 
 a question and a simple answer, not expressed 
 in a hortatory form. So Dr. Naegelsbach : Why 
 does the man who lives mourn ? Every one on 
 account of his sins. So Maurer, quoted by Ger- 
 lach, quidi. e., cur queritur homo dum vivit ? Unus- 
 quisque ob peccata sua. Ilinc illse lacrymse ! 
 Pcccatis sibi quisque contraxit de quibus queritur 
 mala. " Why does man mourn whilst he lives ? 
 Every one on account of his sins. Hence those 
 tears ! By his sins each one has brought on him- 
 self the evils he complains of." A great objection 
 to dividing this verse into question and answer 
 is, that it mars the rhythmical parallelism which 
 is a peculiar feature of this poem [see Intr., Add. 
 Rem., p. 23], and quite destroys the remarkable 
 and beautiful symmetry between the several 
 verses of each triplet, which prevails in this part 
 of the poem. For the same reason that each verse 
 in this triplet should be a question, if one is, each 
 verse ought to contain a question and an answer, 
 if one does, — or else each v^erse should form an 
 entire question by itself. Besides, the connec- 
 tion seems to require such a construction. The 
 declarations that God does not inflict evil will- 
 ingly, from His heart, that He does not look with 
 favor on oppression and injustice, and yet that 
 nothing comes to pass without His permission, 
 whether it be evil or good, prepares us for the 
 question. Why then does man murmur when he 
 suffers in the righteous Providence of God for 
 hig sins ? Why should living man — man whose 
 life is mercifully spared — complain or murmur, 
 every one on account of his sins, i. e., of the effects 
 of his sins? The idea of dividing the sentence 
 into a question and response arose, undoubtedly, 
 from the difficulty of taking 13J in the usual 
 sense of a man. But by rendering it every one, 
 and remembering that DIX is generic, like homo, 
 av\}puT7oc, Mensch, and can be best expressed in 
 English by men, as even in German Luther 
 rendered it, Wie murren denn die Leute im 
 Lebeu also? the apparent difficulty of construc- 
 tion entirely disappears. Why should living men 
 complain or murmur, every one on account of his sins ? 
 There can be no valid objection to understanding 
 sins as put for their efl^ects, the sufferings or 
 punishment they involve. So most of the ver- 
 sions and interpreters. Or we can take sin in the 
 sense of guilt, liability to punishment. Worps- 
 WORTH : " Literally, for hi» sins — for his own 
 
124 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 fault. Why does the sinner murmur at God for I See what follows." — The Future form of the verb 
 that which he has brought on himself by his own implies here a conditional sense, why thould, etc. 
 sin, and which may be removed by repentance ? — W. H. H.] 
 
 III. 40-42. 
 
 40 Let us search and try our ways, and turn again lo the Lord. Let us lift 
 
 41 up our heart with our hands unto God in the heavens. We have transgressed 
 
 42 and have rebelled : thou hast not pardoned. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Yer. 40. — jJ'Sn, perfodere, pervestigare, is not found in Jeremiah. See Ps. Ixiv. 7 ; Prov. ii. 4 ; xx. 27. — "IpH, fodere, 
 
 - T 1-T 
 
 eruere., perscrutari, occurs in Jer. xvii. 10; xxxi. 37. — [Gerlach : " The LXX have taken the forms HlS'Snj and n^pDJ 
 
 T : : - t:I ; - 
 
 for fern. part, niph."] — ^^ is emphatic, Ewald, §217, e. let us go back, not half way, but the whole. [Rosenmueller and 
 
 Thenius deny that it is emphatic, and represent it as equivalent to 7K- Gerlach agrees with Naegelsbach, and refers 
 
 to Hos. xiv. 2, 3, where both prepositions stand side by side with a difference of meaning not to be mistaken.] 
 
 Ver. 41.— 7X is cumulative, as Lev. xviii. 18; Ez. xliv. 7. [AlsoEz. vii. 26. The unusual use of this preposition led 
 
 the Rabbins to fanciful interpretations of the text. Some have put upon it the mystical sense, lift up our heart to 
 
 our hands, in order to second prayer with practice, (Qatakbr). — W. H. H.] — 337 Xit'J occurs only here. Wn^ji jH 
 
 T •• T T . _ ^ _ .. 
 
 occurs not in Jer. See Deut. iii. 24 ; 1 Kings viii. 23. 
 
 Ver. 42. — ^Jfl^i only occurs six times in the Old Testament, viz., besides here, Gen. xlii. 11; Ex. xvi. 7, 8; Num. 
 
 xxxii. 33 ; 2 Sam. xvii. 12, seems to be choseu here only for the sake of the acrostic. [Very likely ; yet, as a master of 
 
 art, the Poet has made the necessity of the choice subserve the force and beauty of thought and expression. ^JPJ and 
 
 : T 
 nnXi t>oth expressed, are emphatic and antithetical. — W. H. H.]— ytyj in Jer. ii. 8,29; iii. 13, etc. — 7T^0> See i. 18, 20; 
 
 T- ■ -T TT 
 
 Jer. iv. 17, v. 23. — H/D, frequently in Jer. v. 1, 7; xxxi. 34, etc. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 39 constitutes the transition to something 
 new. If there must be sighing, let it be sighing 
 over sin says ver. 39. This exhortation is re- 
 sponded to in vers. 40-42, for these cont.ain a 
 penitential lamentation of the people for their 
 sins. This shows that our explanation of the 
 last member of ver. 39 is right. For, unless 
 XCOn, sm, be talien in the entirely unadmissible 
 sense of j9Mm.sAme«< (Meier, Ewald), [E. V. See 
 notes on ver. 39], tliat second member of ver. 39 
 cannot be taken as a continuation of the ques- 
 tion, but only in the sense of an affirmatory 
 restriction, as we have done. It is to be observed, 
 moreover, thit the Poet here again spealts in 
 the first pprsoii plural. We have shown above, 
 at ver. 22 (0?i3)> that the consoling hope, de- 
 clared in the passage beginning with ver. 22, 
 rests directly upon tiie fact that the people is not 
 extinct, that there is yet a kernel remaining 
 which can serve as a point of connection for the 
 restoration. After the Poet, on the ground of 
 this matter of fact, which he regarded as a pledge 
 for the continuance of Divine grace, had made 
 known his hope, and declared likewise his con- 
 victions that suflFerings were no real misfortune, 
 and that not on their account, but for sin, should 
 men sigh, it is entirely natural that he utters the 
 penitential lamentation, enjoined in ver. 39, not 
 in his own name alone, but in that of the whole 
 people. For the suflFerings, of which he had 
 before spoken, were not in fact punishments for 
 his sins; but they were the righteous chastise- 
 ment of the sin of the whole people. The whole 
 
 people then has to join in the penitential lamen- 
 tation, which the Poet begins to sing in ver. 40. 
 
 Ver. 40. All true penitence must begin with 
 acknowledgment of sin. But the knowledge of 
 sin with men is the result of candid self-exami- 
 nation. Therefore, the penitential lamentation 
 of the people begins with an exhortation to self- 
 examination. Let us search and try our 
 ways. Let us examine our ways and search. [In- 
 stead of murmuring against God, let us examine 
 and search our conduct for the causes of God's 
 displeasure and our misfortunes, in order to cor- 
 rect them. — W. H. H.]. — And turn again to 
 the LORD. — And return to Jehovah. The pre- 
 position in the Hebrew is forcible. [See Gram. 
 note above]. Let us go, not half way back, but 
 all the way back to Jehovah. Such a half-way 
 return was, for example, the Reformation under 
 Josiah ; see Jer. iv. 1-4, and the remarks at that 
 place. This idea of returning to Jehovah, as is 
 well known, plays a very conspicuous role in 
 Jeremiah ; see iii. 1, 4, 12 ; viii. 4, 5 ; xxxi. 16-22, 
 and the comments on those passages. [Hender- 
 son : " From the assumption of the plural in this 
 and the immediately following verses, it is obvi- 
 ous that, in those which just precede, Jeremiah 
 has in view the punishment to which the Jews, 
 as a people, were subjected."] 
 
 Ver. 41. Let us lift up our heart with— 
 together with — our hands unto God in the 
 Heavens. — Without the lifting up of heart and 
 hands to God there is naturally no right return 
 to God imaginable. [Calvin: "He bids u-< 
 banish all hypocrisy from our prayers. * * 
 When affliction comes, it is a common thing with 
 all to raise up their hands to heaven, though no 
 
CHAP. 111. 43-6G. 
 
 12i 
 
 •ne should bid them to do so ;. but still their 
 hearts remain fixed on the earth, and they come 
 not to God. * * As prayers, when they are 
 earnest, move the hands, our Prophet refers to 
 that practice as useful. At the same time he 
 teaches us that the chief thing ought not to be 
 omitted, even to raise up the hearts to God ; Let 
 us, then, he says, rceiee up our hearts together with 
 our hands to God: and, he adds, to God luho in 
 in Heaven : for it is necessary that men should 
 rise up above the world and go out o) themselves, 
 so to speak, in order to come to God." It should 
 not be overlooked that the Prophet connects the 
 outward forms of expression with the heart's 
 sincerity as constituting the prayer of true peni- 
 tence. There is nothing here to encourage those 
 to think that they pray, who discard the attitude 
 and gestures and even words of prayer, and fancy 
 that they pray in their hearts. That prayer is 
 an unuttered desire, a trembling emotion of the 
 soul, a sigh, a tear, the glancing of an eye, — are 
 only poetical truths, and, in plain prose, are 
 only half-truths, and, as sometimes understood, 
 half- falsehoods. The Bible never separates the 
 prayer of the heart from its formal expression 
 in words and acts. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 42. The first half of the verse attains the 
 summit of the succession of thoughts begun in 
 ver. 40, and to which the path was broken in ver. 
 39. — We have transgressed and rebelled. 
 — We have sinned and have been disobedient. \_Re- 
 belled is a better rendering. The pronoun we, 
 doubly expressed in the original, as the first 
 word in the sentence and in the forms of the 
 verb, " is here emphatical, as though the faith- 
 ful had taken on themselves the blame of all the 
 evils, which the greater part ever sought to dis- 
 own" (Calvin). Owen: "To give the proper 
 emphasis to the pronoun, the version ought to 
 be as follows, We, transgressed have we, and re- 
 
 belled.'' — W. H. H.] — By these words the exhor- 
 tation contained in last clause of ver. 39 is com- 
 plied with, for they are the expression of a deep 
 and sincere grief for sin. The second half of 
 the verse constitutes, in a way similar to that 
 of the last clause of ver. 39, the transition to 
 what follows. For the words — Thou hast not 
 pardoned — constitute an intermediate member 
 between the two statements, which have respec- 
 tively lor their subjects, guilt and punishment. 
 Guilt is followed with punishment, if not par- 
 doned. That it is not pardoned in the present 
 instance, this last clause of the verse declares. — 
 Observe the pronouns answering to each other. 
 We — Thou. [Both doubly expressed in the He- 
 brew. Both, therefore, emphatic. — W. H. H.] — 
 Hence it is evident that the Poet does not wish 
 to reproach the Lord, but, on the contrary, to 
 make His proceedings conspicuous. [Henderson: 
 " The confession is supposed to be made while 
 the exile still continued. There is implied a 
 fervent hope, that now it was made, the captivity 
 would be reversed." — The breaking up of this 
 verse into two distinct separate propositions is 
 not such an injury to the versification as was 
 deprecated in ver. 39. Because we have now 
 passed the section where the symmetrical unifor- 
 i.iity of the verses was to be preseived: because, 
 again, this verse is a real transition to what fol- 
 lows, with" which it is so intimately connected 
 that Gerlach begins the new section with ver. 
 40: because, again, the We, ^JHJ, and Thou, 
 nn5<, preserve a perfect antithesis, and give us 
 
 a parallelism in sentiments as well as in rhythm 
 and because, finally, the poetical effect of this 
 abrupt appeal to God, like the sudden outburst 
 at the end of i. 11, See, Jehovah, and consider, 
 justifies the departure from the stricter forma of 
 construction. — W H. H.] 
 
 PART III. 
 
 III. 43-66. 
 
 D Ver. 43. Thou didst cover Thyself with wrath and pursue ub, 
 
 Thou didst slay ,^— Thou didst not pity. 
 D Ver. 44. Thou didst cover Thyself with clouds 
 
 So that no prayer could pass through, 
 D Ver. 45. Thou madest us offscourings and refuse 
 
 In the midst of the nations. 
 £) Ver. 46. All our enemies 
 
 Gaped at us with their mouth. 
 £3 Ver. 47. Terror and the pit came upon us — 
 
 Desolation and destruction. 
 £3 Ver. 48. Mine eye runneth down with streams of water 
 
 For the ruin of the daughter of my people. 
 ^ Ver. 49. Mine eye overfloweth unceasingly, 
 
 Without intermission, 
 J? Ver. 50. Until Jehovah from Heaven 
 
 Look down and behold. 
 
126 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 y Ver. 51. Mine eye paineth my soul 
 
 Because of all the daughters of my city. 
 V Ver. 52. They that were without cause my enemies 
 
 Hunted me down like a bird. 
 y Ver. 53. They destroyed in the pit my life 
 
 And cast a stone over me. 
 ^ Ver. 54. Waters flowed upon my head. 
 
 I said, — I am lost! 
 p Ver. 55. I called upon thy name, O Jehovah, 
 
 Out of the depths of the pit. 
 p Ver. 56. Thou heardest my cry — hide not Thine ear 
 
 From my prayer for relief! 
 p Ver. 57. Thou drewest near on the day when I called to Thee \ 
 
 Thou saidst, — Fear not! 
 "1 Ver. 58. Thou didst espouse the causes of my soul, 
 
 Thou didst rescue my life. 
 "1 Ver. 59. Thou, O Jehovah, hast seen the wrong done to me. 
 
 Judge Thou my cause. 
 "l Ver. 60. Thou hast seen all their vengeance, 
 
 All their devices against me. 
 ^ Ver. 61. Thou hast heard their revilings, O Jehovah, 
 
 All their devices against me. 
 £5^ Ver. 62. The lips of my enemies and their thoughts 
 
 Against me, all the day long, 
 JJ^ Ver. 63. Their sitting down and rising up, observe Thou; 
 
 I am their song! 
 n Ver. 64. Render to them a recompence, O Jehovah, 
 
 According to the work of their hands. 
 n Ver, 65. Give them blindness of heart. 
 
 Thy curse on them ! 
 n Ver. 66. Pursue them in wrath and exterminate them 
 
 From under the Heaven of Jehovah. 
 
 ANALYSIS. 
 
 The third part, verp. 43-66, is to be compared to the night returning again after the day. From ver. 48 
 to ver. 48, the Poet speaks in the first person plural. The whole people unite in describing the severe 
 calamity suffered on account of God's wrath. From ver. 48 to the end, the Poet again speaks in the 
 first person singular. But in the first part of this passage, in vers. 48-51, the common misfortune is 
 ttill the subject of his lamentation. He begins again to speak of himself in ver. 52. He first describes, 
 vers. 52-54, the terrible ill-treatment suffered at the hands of men, according to Jer. xxxviii. 6. 
 Vers. 55-66 contain a prayer, so that this Song, as well as the first and second, closes with a prayer. 
 This prayer is in three parts. Vers. 55-58, thanks for deliverance from the grave. Vers. 59-63. a 
 statement of all the injur g which his enemies had done, and were constantly doing to the Prophet. 
 Vers. 64-66, a prayer for righteous vengeance. The symmetry of the external form, which we have 
 observed in the middle section of the Song, is wanting here, as it is also in the first part of the Song. 
 For according to the sense, first, five verses are connected together, vers. 43-47 ; then, four, vers. 48- 
 51 ; then, three, vers. 52-54 ; finally, twelve, which are again separated into subdivisions of four, 
 five and three verses. The articulations of the discourse no longer correspond with the triplets of 
 verses : neither is the symmetry of the initial words carried out. 
 
 A$ the evening twilight gradually deepens in(o night, so the discourse of our Poet passes over from the bright 
 day-light of consolation, which irradiates the nohle central section of our book, back again into the 
 gloomy description of those sufferings with which Israel and the Prophet of the Lord were punished. 
 We stand at the threshold of the last of the three sections of the third Song. If not exactly, yet al- 
 most exactly has the Poet distributed the lights and shadows, so that the first and the last of the three 
 parts contain the shadows, ana the second one affords the light. For of the 66 verses of the chapter, 
 22 constitute a third part. But the middle section, after the transition verses, 19-21, extends from \er. 
 22 to ver. 40, after which vers. 40-42 follow as another transition, corresponding tothe first one as the 
 evening twilight does to the dawning of the morning. If we add both of these transition passages to the 
 middle section, then the first of the three sections consists of 18, the second of 24, and the last again of 
 24 verses. 
 
CHAP. III. 43-47. 
 
 127 
 
 III. 43-47. 
 
 43 Thou hast covered with anger, and persecuted us : thou hast slain, thou hast not 
 
 44 pitied. Thou hast covered thyself with a cloud, that our prayer should not pass 
 
 45 through. Thou hast made us as the ofFscouring and refuse in the midst of the peo- 
 46, 47 pie. All our enemies have opened their mouths against us. Fear and a snare 
 
 is come upon us, desolations and destruction. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 43. — ^DD, which does not occur in Jeremiali, is used as a direct causative, as afterwards, ver. 44; See Ps. cxl. 8. 
 [Gerlach : "Gesenius rftes., and Otto take 'HDD as a reflective verb." Otto, quoted by Rosenmuellbr, says .4i reciprose 
 verbum "^20 usurpari posse, nondubium ; but he prefers here to supply nos as the object of the verb. To make the pron. 
 suf. in ^ JDT^jl the object of 7]3D, however, is impossible, since the latter, when it has the meaning otcoeering, is always 
 construed with 7j;, or 7 affixed to its object. — W. H. H.] — nX3, see Jer. xxi. 5.— [5<S- Hendersox: "Upwards of eighty 
 MSS., twelve printed editions, the Alex, copy of the LXX., the Arab., Syr., Vulg. and Targ , read X/V"] 
 
 Ver. 44.— Jeremiah uses only the plural of rjy, and that only once, iv. 13.— plSsp IIDyO, for the construction, see 
 
 Itt t- : -:|-- 
 
 my Gr., § 106, 6. [The preposition JO is very peculiarly used as a negative. When the idea oi motion from a place is in- 
 volved, then that which is denied is connected with the verb simply by JO. Naegelsbach's Gr., J 106, 6.] 
 
 Ver. 45. — ^nO from nnD> dete/rgere, everrere, Esr. xxvl. 4, is sioeepings, dirt. It occurs only here. [In Is. v. 25 we have 
 nn^D, sweeping, refuse, filth (J. A. Alexander). — W. H. H.]— ^IXO, as a substantive, only here. See Ewald, Z 240, a — 
 
 T T 
 
 Jeremiih expresses the thought contained in this verse in another fiishion, see xv. 4 ; xxiv. 9: xxix. 18; xxxiv. 17 ; xlii. 
 18. — D'S Vn 3np3 seems to imply the dispersion of Israel amoug the nations. ^Ipi is nowhere found in Jeremiah, he 
 
 always uses instead ^in3, xii. 16 ; xxix. ,32; xl. 1; xli. 8, ete.; once only he uses 2TpO, vi. 1, and Besides 21p3 with suf- 
 fixes frequently iv. 14 ; xiv. 9 ; xxiii. 9.«te. [Certainly then J1p3 is not foreign to ins style. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 47.— nnSI 1113 is a quotation from Jer. xlviii. 43; Is. xxiv. 11 .—'S'ZWTW nXK^H- The paronomasia, an imita- 
 tion of jinDI inD, is an invention of our Poet, for it is found only here.— PXl!', apparently from nXt^i tumultuari, strepere, 
 
 is contracted from J^Xty. In Num. xxiv. 17, is found r\V- The meaning seems to be the same as that of JlXty, strepitus, 
 
 ■ "■■ ■■ I T 
 
 tumuUus. See JlXtJ' 'J3, Jor. xlviii. 45, and the remarks at that place. Also '^2V^ "Vl!, Is. lix. 7 ; Ix. 18.— l^I^;, see ver. 
 
 48 ; ii. 11, 13; iv. 10, is very frequent with Jeremiah, iv. 20 ; vi. 14; viii. 11, 21, etc. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 43. Thou hast covered •with anger, 
 and persecuted us. — Thou mndest out of 
 Thy wrath a veil [or covering] and didst pur.tue 
 us. As Thou hast not pardoned, ver. 42, consti- 
 tutes a negative term of connection, so does Than, 
 madest a covering of Thy wrath a positive oik'. 
 For the veil of wrath with which the Lord covers 
 Himself, conceals in its bosom the lightnings of 
 wrath of which the Poet proceeds to speak. [Tlie 
 causative meaning given to the verb by Ur. NAii- 
 GELSBACH, and implied, though not affiimed liy 
 Geri,ach, is certainly possible (see Ps. xci. 4, 
 ■!|7 ^p' ipl3X3, lit., With his wing He toill make, 
 or provide, .1. A. Alexander, a covering for thee), 
 and is sirongly recommended here by tiie absence 
 of an otyect expressed. He made a covering of the 
 wrath and pursued xis, is the same as saying, He 
 enveloped Himself in His wrath and pursued us. 
 The detiuite article before ivrath, the wrath, points 
 to .Jehovah's wrath, and makes the reflective 
 force of the verb more apparent. In the next 
 verse, vvliere the cloud does not specify any par- 
 ticular cloud, but only clouds generically, the ex- 
 pression of "Y), for Thyself, is more elegant. 
 These slight grammatical distinctions can hardly 
 be expressed in English, in which it is best to give j 
 the b.ime form in both verses. — The purpose of | 
 the covering is not that ot concealment, but of pre- | 
 paration for the pursuit of His enemies. He | 
 
 dismisses His pity and gathers His wrath around 
 Him as a veil that covers the whole person, that 
 He may sZrtfj/ and not pity. Or His wrath itself 
 may be regarded as furnishing His weapons of 
 ofi"ence, the armory out of which flash the light- 
 nings of His wrath. Therefore the objection of 
 J. D. MicHAELis, BoETTCHER and Thenius, that 
 \ he %oho conceals himself, does not pursue others (al- 
 though a concealed enemy may, nevertheless, be 
 a pursuer), is not valid. We must either take 
 the verb in a causative or reflective sense, or sup- 
 ply ^7, Thyself, from the next verse. This last 
 'is exceedingly awkward. If the order of the 
 verses was reversed, this might be tolerated, 
 though even then it is inconsistent with the usual 
 independent completeness of each separate verse 
 in the Lamentations. But to say "Thou didst 
 cover with wrath " — and then hold the mind in 
 suspense, as to the object covered, till it is an- 
 nounced in the next verse, is awkward to say the 
 least, and certainly has the effect, as Thenius 
 asserts, of throwing all that follows the word 
 wrath into a parenthesis. — Our English Version 
 and others which make us, at the end of the verse, 
 the object of the covering cannot be correct if the 
 verb is here used intlie sense of coycrm^( see Gram, 
 note above). Some old expositors, alluded to by 
 Gataker, take the verb in the sense oih&\ng hedged 
 in. Blayney and Owen take it in this sense, and 
 suppose an allusion to the practice of hunters, 
 who surrounded their game with toils, and then 
 attacked them. Thou hast fenced in with anger 
 
125 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 and chased us (Blayney). Thou hast in wrath 
 enclosed us and chased us (Owen). But how can 
 there be an allusion to this practice of hunters 
 in the next verse, where they give the verb the 
 eame meaning, — Thou hast enclosed Thyself in a 
 cloud (Owen) ? Henderson also, without allusion 
 to hunting however, gives the verb in both verses 
 a similar meaning, Thou hast shut us up in anger, 
 — Thou hast shut Thyself up in a cloud. But the 
 Hebrew verb when followed by the preposition 
 
 7, to, prefixed to the pronoun, as it is in the next 
 verse, certainly means covering one's self with 
 something, as with a garment or a veil. See vev. 
 44, note. Hence it is best to take it in flie same 
 sense in this verse. — W. H. H.] — Thou hast 
 slain, thou hast not pitied. — Thou didst kill 
 without mercy. [The E. V. is more literal. Many 
 versions have spared, instead of pitied. The latter 
 meaning is better here, and the more usual sig- 
 nification of the verb when not joined to a pre- 
 position. See ii. 2, 17. — W. H. H.] See ii. 21. 
 Here begins the enumeration of the aggressive 
 acts of the Divine punishment, through which 
 the wrath, as it were, spent itself. See ver. 66 ; 
 i. 6; Jer. xxix. 18, etc. 
 
 Ver. 44. Thou hast covered thyself with 
 a cloud, that our prayer should not pass 
 through. — Thou madest of the cloud a covering for 
 Thyself that no prayer could pass throtigh. See at 
 
 ver. 8. The twice recurring verb nmJD, thou 
 coveredst, has been difi"erently interpreted. Ewald 
 would take what follows the word wrath, in ver. 
 43, as a parenthesis. But these words closely 
 connected with what precedes by 1 consecutive, 
 contain no mere secondary thought. Others 
 (LuTUER, Thenius) translate. Thou hast covered 
 [overwhelmed) us with wrath. But the verb has 
 always and only the meaning of friendly shelter- 
 ing, veiling or covering: and further, in that 
 case we would expect at least ^N3 [instead of 
 pN!l, with wrath, instead of with thewrath']. But, 
 aside from the constraint put upon the Poet by 
 the alphabetical arrangement [inducing him to 
 repeat the same word for the sake of the initial 
 letter], I think that two grades or kinds of cover- 
 ing are indicated. Tiie first was that, in conse- 
 quence of which persecution and war came upon 
 Israel, — the second was that, in consequence of 
 wliich, God heard not the prayers addressed to 
 Him amidst the calamity of war. In favor of 
 this view is the twofold nature of the veils or 
 coverings indicated. The first time it is the wrath 
 with wliich the Lord envelops Himself. Out 
 of this veil of wrath shoot forth the lightnings, 
 as out of a thunder-cloud, which kindle the fire 
 of war in Israel. The second time tiie veil or 
 covering is only a gloomy, dense cloud, which, 
 like a bulwark, prevents prayer from passing 
 through. Whether the Poet here thought of the 
 hi.slorical pillar of cloud (Ps. xcix. 7), or of an 
 ideal one (Ps. xcvii. 2), must remain undecided. 
 See, besides ver. 8; Ps. Iv. 2, and especially Sir. 
 xxxii. 16, 17. 
 
 v'er. 45. Thou hast made us as the off- 
 scouring and refuse in the midst of the 
 people. — 77/ow didst make us offscourings and re- 
 fuse in the midst of the nations. Since the Lord 
 
 permitted no prayer to pass through to Him, the 
 work of destruction, spoken of in ver. 4.3, made 
 unimpeded progress ; the consequence of which 
 was, that Israel, ground down to the dust, is now 
 an object of coiifetnpt among heathen nations. 
 [Offscouring, sweepings, what is swept away. — Re- 
 fuse, what is rejected as worthless, what is thrown 
 away. — Calvin: "Paul says, that he and his 
 associates were the ofiFscouring [Tvepiipf^/jara) of 
 the world, 1 Cor. iv. 13. He means that they 
 were despised as offscourings or scrapings. * * 
 What the Prophet had in view is not obscure ; 
 for he means that the degradation of the people 
 was not hidden, but open to all nations, as though 
 God had erected a theatre in Judea, and there 
 exhibited a remarkable and an unusual example 
 of His vengeance," — among the nations. Words- 
 worth: " The nations, among which we Israelites 
 are scattered. Such the Jewish nation has been 
 for 1800 years; and such it will remain till it 
 turn to God in Christ."— W. H. H.J See Is. 
 xxiv. 13. 
 
 Ver. 46. Here again, in the order of the initial 
 letters, is followed by £3, and not ^. That this 
 was the original order of the verses and not the 
 result of later changes, the context undeniably 
 proves. It is, therefore, certainly incomprehen- 
 sible how any one could have thought of placing 
 the triad of vers. 46-48, after that of vers. 49-51 
 (Meier) [Boothroyd, likewise]. — All our ene- 
 mies have opened their mouths against 
 us, — gaped at us with their mouth. This verse, 
 which contains only a more particular definition 
 of what is meant by D1N0 \refuse, or as Dr. Nae- 
 GELSBACH translates it Schande, shame, disgrace^ 
 in ver. 45, has already occurred almost word for 
 word, in ii. 16, which see. 
 
 Ver. 47. Fear and a snare — terror and the 
 pit. A quotation from Jer. xlviii. 43 ; Is. xxiv. 
 17. [Calvin, Brougiiton, Blayney, Noyes, 
 Naegelsbach and Gerlach, all translate the 
 second word pit, as it is rendered in Jeremiah 
 and Isaiah, in the places cited above. In the 
 latter place. Dr. J. A. Alexander says, "It is a 
 probable, though not a necessary supposition, 
 that the terms here used are borrowed from the 
 ancient art of hunting. HHiD [/ear] would then 
 denote some device by vchich wild beasts were 
 frightened into snares and pitfalls. It is at least 
 a remarkable coincidence that the Romans gave 
 the name formido to an apparatus used for this 
 purpose." We may, however, take fear in its 
 usual sense, without destroying the allusion to 
 hunted wild beasts, suggested in this passsage 
 by pit, and in Jeremiah and Isaiah by j^it and 
 snare. He who flies for terror falls into the pit. 
 So Jarchi, quoted by Gerlach. Calvin: "He 
 compares here the anxieties into which the peo- 
 ple had been brought, to & pitfall and dread. * * 
 The meaning is, tliat the people had been reduced 
 to such straits, that there was no outlet for them; 
 * * filled with dread, they sought refuge, but 
 saw pitfalls on every side." — W. H. H.] Is come 
 upon us, — fell to our lot [happened to zis, or came 
 upon us], desolation and destruction — shame 
 and hurt. [Tiie E. V. is better, and is adopted 
 by most versions. See Gram, note above. — W. 
 H. H.] In these pithy and forcible words th« 
 Poet sums up all that Israel had suffered. 
 
 ^ 
 
CHAP. III. 48-51. 
 
 iiiy 
 
 III. 48-61. 
 
 48 Mine eye runneth down with rivers of water for the destruction of the daughter 
 
 49 of my people. Mine eye triekleth down, and ceaseth not, without any intermission. 
 50, 51 Till the Lord look down, and behold from heaven. Mine eye affecteth mine 
 
 heart, because of all the daughters of my city. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 48. — The first clause is found in Ps. cxix. 136, almost word for word. For construction, see my Gr., § 69, 2 a. 
 
 [AttoT yeihs of plenty a,nA want, the accusative denotes the more remote object (Naeg. Gr.)]. — J7£3 Jeremiah never uses. 
 
 [Observe it is here the initial word, where special choice and even preference for novelty of expression would be expected. — 
 W. H. II.] 
 
 Ver. 49. — The verb "1JJ, of which Jeremiah uses the Hiphil, once only [Jeremiah seems to have been predisposed to use 
 
 words (m'y rmce, — so new words in Lamentations need not surprise us, Jeremiah being the author. — W. H. H.], xviii. 21, oc- 
 curs only in Niph., Hipli. and lloph. Such places a.s 2 Sam. xiv. 14; Job xx. 28; Ps. Ixxvii. 3, give it the sense of over- 
 flowing, a.3 weW as of being poured out. — nOTn X'71 reminds us of ^J''0^P~7X^, Jer. xiv. 17. — Jlijlin TXO seems to 
 
 be only another form of the same thought in Ps. Ixxvii. 3, where we read the words J13j"\ X'^l iTlJJ ''T- J1i3 i» 
 
 T : T : • • T 
 
 debikm, languidum esse, viribus defici (Gen. xlv. 26; Hab. i. 4). Both HJIS, "• 18, aud HJ^Sn, signify remissio, relaxatio. 
 
 T T ~: 
 
 Both are an. Key. See ii. 18 and remarks there. 
 
 Vei\ 50. — "Ipty (comp. (TKin-reaOai., spectare) ia prospicere, despicere. It occurs only in Hiph. and Niph. ; is not found 
 
 in Jeremiah; set' Deut. xxvi. 15 ; Ps. xiv. 2 ; liii. 3; cii. 20, in all of which places the word ia used with the addition of 
 
 D'Otyp or D'nsp. 
 
 Ver. 51. — If we compare the Hithp. 77yr\n, which in such places as Num. xxii. 29; Judg. xix. 25; 1 Sam. xxxi. 4; 
 
 Jer. xxxviii. 19, has the sense of satisfying one's desire by violence; if, further, we compare the substantives n7''7j^, 
 
 n'7' /y, and ^^VO, which denote, not merely generally /ociraiw, a deed, but also especially a bad deed (see Deut. xxii. 14, 
 
 17 ; P."!. cxli. 4 ; Kz. xx. 43 ; Jer. xiv. 18 ; xi. IS, etc.) ; — there can be no doubt that the idea of doing a harm inheres in the 
 Poel also. Iiii. IJ, '22; ii. 20, where also this word occurs, this idea is made e.xpressly apparent by other words of this 
 sense, iiut we are authorized by the above citations, to take the word in this sense, without such express indication of its 
 
 meaning in the context. [Gerlach : / 7I y with 7, to do some one an injury, occurs in i. 12, 22 ; ii. 20 ; therefore there is 
 nothing unusual in the 7 here, as Ewald says.] — Bottcher would read '"T^* 11133 'liJOi of "'U '^^ weeping of my city. 
 But even if Piel is authorized by Jer. xxxi. 15 ; Ez. viii. 14, — and 73 with the Inf., by Deut. iv. 7, yet 'r\i33 would be ex- 
 pected [and then would be ungrammatical, as Gerlach shows]. But no change in the reading is necessary. — JO is causal, 
 as Deut. vii. 7, 8 ; Joel iv. 19 ; Is. liii. 5 ; Prov. xx. 4, eic— 'TJ?, Is. xiv. 13 ; 2 Sam. xix. 38. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Vers. 48-51. These four verses treat of the eye 
 of the speaker, as the organ by means of which 
 he manifests his pain : — for ver. 50 contains only 
 a thought subordinated to that of ver. 49. The 
 new succession of thoughts begins with the last 
 member of a triad (the 3 triad). Nothing like 
 this has occuri-ed before in this Song [where the 
 triplets have been remarkable for their unifica- 
 tion]. Would the Poet thus intimate that he has 
 passed the culmination-point of his Poem, and 
 therefore the culmination-point of its artistic 
 structure also ? It is not easy to decide. Be- 
 sides, the fact that these verses are of the 
 character of one sustained and continuous transi- 
 tion period, is itself an indication of artistic exe- 
 cution. For while in these verses the Poet him- 
 self is the speaker, yet he speaks of his own pain 
 with reference to the public calamity [thus con- 
 necting what is here said with what precedes], 
 whilst from ver. 52 he not only himself speaks, 
 but he speaks of himself [so that these verses 
 form a connecting link with what follows, and 
 the subject gracefully passes from the public 
 calaiuitics to the private griefs of the speaker. — 
 W. 11.11.]. 
 
 A'er. 48. Mine eye runneth down w^ith 
 
 rivers of ■water. — See Ps. cxix. 136. We find 
 the same sentiment in Jer. viii. '1\ [E. V., ix. 1], 
 ix. 17 [E. v., ix. 18], xiii. 17; xiv. 17; Lam. i. 
 16. — For the destruction of the daughter 
 of my people. — See ii. 11. 
 
 Ver 4y. Mine eye triekleth down, and 
 ceaseth not, w^ithout any intermission.— 
 Mine eye overflows unceasingly , without intermission. 
 [Lit., My eye is poured out, or overfloivs, and ceaseth 
 not, so as not to be [from not being) intermission. 
 In correct English, My eye ooerflowelh, unceasingly 
 without intermission. Gerlach: " intermi,'isio>is, 
 not of miseries (Michaehs, Rosenmueller, see 
 Vulg.), but so that there is no cessation, without 
 discontinuance. See Lexicons and Ewald, § 323, 
 a."_W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 50. Till— or until— the LORD— TeAo- 
 vrtA— look dow^n and behold from Heaven. 
 — As already remarked, this is a thought sub- 
 ordinate to that of ver. 49, which it limits, or 
 qualifies. The Poet's tears shall flow without 
 ceasing, not absolutely for ever, but until the 
 Lord, by graciously regarding them, shall cause 
 them to cease. [When God looks down and be- 
 holds. He begins to hear prayer and alFord saving 
 grace. See Ps. cii. 19, 20. Henderson trans- 
 lates, While Jehovah looketh down and beholdeih 
 from Heaven, and remarks, "The Prophet re- 
 garded it as a great aggravation of the calamity, 
 
130 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 that the Lord should see it all, and yet not in- I 
 terpose for its removal." But this is to take the 
 Hebrew preposition 1^, in an unusual sense, and 
 is wholly inconsistent with the constant tenor | 
 of Bible language, which represents God as 
 averting His face from those who otfend Him, 
 and as looking only on those who are objects of I 
 His favor. Besides, here God has wrapped Him- | 
 self in His wrath, ver. 43, and in dark impene- 1 
 trable clouds, ver. 44, that He may not be moved ' 
 to compassion either by the sight or the cries of I 
 the sufferers.— W. H. H.] | 
 
 Ver. 61. The description passes, as it were, 
 from without to within. In vers. 48, 49, the 
 weeping of the Poet had been described with re- 
 gard to its extent [its unintermitted continuance], 
 but here the intensity of that weeping is made ap- i 
 parent froui its internal effect on his soul. — | 
 Mine eye affecteth mine heart (marg., m3/| 
 soul)— Mine eye paineth my soul [or gives it pain, 
 thut meiner Seele weh, makes my soul ache.] The I 
 eye hurts the soul, when it increases the pain of | 
 the soul, by adding thereto a physical pain. It | 
 is true that weeping is generally a relief to the 
 sorrowful. But when weeping weakens the eye 
 so that it smarts, then the soul, as I said, feels 
 that as an aggravation of its own pain. See Ps. 
 vi. 7. [Calvin: " Mine eye grieves my soul. Ho 
 had said, that his eye flowed down, and then, 
 that it was like a fountain, from which many 
 streams or rivers flowed: he now adopts another 
 mode of speaking, that his eye troubled or grieved 
 his souV Broughton: Mine eye worketh into my 
 ioul. Blayney: Mine eye worketh trouble to my 
 soul. NoYEs and Gerlach take my soul as if it. 
 were simply a personal pronoun. Mine eye i: 
 painful to me (Noyes), or pains me (Gerlach). 
 
 But to my sotd, ''tJ'337, as the expressed object 
 of the verb, is indubitably emphatic. So Words- 
 worth : " Mine eye vexeth my soul {nephesh), the 
 seat of passion (see ver. 20) by the misery which 
 it sees, and for which it weeps." See Gram, 
 notes above. — W. H. H.] — Because of all the 
 daughters of my city. It is not necessary to 
 
 change the Hebrew here, as Bottcher proposes 
 (see Gram, notes above), for i. 4, 18 ; ii. 10, 21, 
 show that the Poet regarded the sad fate of the 
 tender virgins as one of the culmination points 
 of the general calamity. For the same reason, I 
 do not think that by the daughters of my city are 
 intended daughter cities. [Tochterstiidte, i. e., 
 cities dependent on Jerusalem. So Ewald. 
 Blayney too : " Probsibly the lesser cities and 
 towns dependent on the metropolis are hereby in- 
 tended, see Jer. xlix. 2."] The Poet nowhere 
 else refers to such cities. Besides, it should be 
 observed, that daughters of my city is in parallel- 
 ism with daughter of my people, ver. 48. This 
 gives a beautiful symmetry to the whole para- 
 graph; the first and last verses, vers. 48, 51, 
 each closes with a statement of a reason for his 
 weeping, while the intervening verses describe 
 the extent arid character of his weeping. [The 
 English version indicates in the margin a possi- 
 ble translation, which Calvin alone has had the 
 audacity to adopt : Mine eye affecteth mine heart 
 more than all the daughters of my city. This would 
 seem to mean, that his heart was more affected 
 by his own grief, than by that of all the daugh- 
 ters of Jerusalem ; or, that his grief affected his 
 own heart, more than it did the daughters of his 
 city. But Calvin explains it as meaning, that 
 he wept more than all the girls in Jerusalem ! 
 "As the female sex, as it is well known, are more 
 tender and softer than men, the Prophet ampli- 
 fies his lamentation by this comparison, that in 
 weeping he exceeded all the young women of the 
 city, so that he had almost forgotten his man- 
 hood." Kalkar takes the daughters of the city in 
 the impossible sense of mcolm urbis (an ingenious 
 adoption of a feminine form used for common 
 gender), and translates / was more vehemently af- 
 fected than all the inhabitants of the city. The 
 simple and natural translation of the words gives 
 such good sense and is so in harmony with the 
 sentiments of the whole poem, as shown above, 
 that it is astonishing what wasteful invention has 
 been used to find out some other sense. — W. 
 H. H.] 
 
 III. 62-54. 
 
 52, 53 Mine enemies chased me sore, like a bird, without cause. They have cut off 
 54 my life in the dungeon, and cast a stone upon me. Waters flowed over mine head ; 
 then I said, I am cut off. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 52. — The verb Hi) 2f Jeremiah uses once, xvi. 16. — lf£)y Jeremiah never uses. [Jeremiah often uses HIV in the 
 collective s&ns& for fowl or birds. In one single verse, xii. 9, he twice uses £0'"_J^, meaning birds of prey, ravenous birds. 
 This passage in Lamentations is the only place where he has occasion to speak of a single bird pursued by the hunter. If he 
 had ever used another word in the same sense, T13^ would have been chosen for this place for the sake of the alliteration, 
 *113X3 ' jnX nV, and also as suggesting the twittering of the helpless victim.— W. H. H.]— The expression Diin ^^'i^ 
 octiirs only here. In Ps. xxxv. 19; Ixix. f), UIV\ 'N]!i' occurs, both times in parallelism with ^pK? 'D'S?- Tliis shows 
 
 that Din belongs, as an adverbial qualification, to O' >?, not to ' jnV- 
 T • - : • T 
 
 Vci . 5:5. — r\"3V occurs in Kal only here, Niph. is without doubt extingui (Job xxiii. 17), exarescere (of water, Job vi. 
 - T 
 17) ; Piol is perdere, to destroy (Ps. Ixxxviii. 17 ; cxix, 139) ; Iliph. has the same sense (Ps, xviii. 41 ; liv. 7 ; Ixix. 5, etc.). 
 
 nOX might indeed have an intransitive sense, to be sunk in silence, in speeclilessn^s, that is to say, to be destroyed, to per 
 
CHAP. III. 52-54. 
 
 131 
 
 iih, in favor of which sense are the kindred roots QV^, DO'!. HOTi and the Dialects. [So HEia>£RSON : ITiet/ Tiave maii 
 
 — T T T 
 
 my life sihnt in the dungerm.] But since in all the parallel members of the paragraph, vers. 52-54, the enemies are the sub- 
 ject, it is necessary to regard them as the subject of IHOlf also, and to take this word in a transitive sense. If nOV 
 
 : T -T 
 
 signifies destroy, 1133 can signify in the. pit, or into the pit. In the latter case it would be constr. prxgnans. This would b« 
 
 more correct, because it better answers to the fact. For the enemies did not succeed in destroying the life of the prophet 
 in the pit, but casting it down into the pit for the purpose of destruction.— ITT. with reference to the form, see HJ'T, ver 
 
 33 [Green's Gr., ? 150, 2.] 
 
 Ver. 5-i. — n-iy is manare, Jluere. Kal occurs only here. Elsewhere the Hiphil at two places, Deut. xi. i; 2 Kings vi. 
 
 6. [The use of Kal may indicate that the word here denotes, not as in Hipliil, dashing over, overwhelming, but, like n?I 
 
 and 31f, to 7nelt, dissolve, flow, trickle down. This sense is favored by the preposition 71?, to, on, not over. — W. H. H.]— 
 
 'HTOX, see TD5<1, ver. IS. — 'pITJlJ. 1TJ is dissecare, discindere. Jeremiah never uses it. Niph., besides here, in la. 
 
 • : - T - T • : |T : • -t 
 
 liii. 8 ; I's. Ixxxviii. 6; Ez. x.\xvii. 11, etc. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Vers. 52-54. The speaker here returns to the 
 description of his own personal sufferings. The 
 central point of these sufferings is the pit, into 
 which the Prophet has been thrown, and that by 
 enemies who were personally hostile to him with- 
 out cause (ver. 52). and who pursued him inces- 
 santly (ver. 52) with vindictiveness and mociiery 
 (vers. 60-63). Ought we to interpret all that is 
 said of the pit as merely figurative? So far as 
 what is said of the pit alone, this could be done. 
 But what the Poet says of his enemies, cannot 
 possibly be a mere figure of speech. When he 
 mourns that though he had given them no cause 
 for hatred, tliey had, nevertheless, incessantly 
 insulted him and pursued him with measureless 
 vengeance, — this surely is no figurative way of 
 speaking. We have already shown that the sub- 
 ject who speaks in this song (except in those 
 parts in which the Poet speaks in the first person 
 plural) cannot be the people. The enemies, 
 further, cannot be the Chaldeans, because they 
 are called those that are. viy enemies icithoiit cau.-!e, 
 and because the Poet speaks of his being already 
 delivered from their power and now only invokes 
 [not deliverance from them but] the vengeance 
 of God upon them (vers. 55-66). On the other 
 hand, Jeremiah speaks of his enemies, xx. 7-12, 
 exactly as is done here. He describes their in- 
 sulting mockery [For 1 heard the defaming of many) 
 and their vindictiveness (rve shall, take our revenge 
 on him, Til'3'p ■Ijr\"OpJ nnpj, ver. 10, comp. Lam. 
 iii. 60), and hopes that God will avenge him upon 
 them [let me see thy vengeance on them, ver. 12). 
 Since the description of his enemies in this place 
 exactly corresponds with that which Jeremiah 
 gives of his enemies, all of which is confirmed 
 by so many facts related in his prophetical book 
 (xi. 18-20; xii. 1-6; ixvi. 8; xxxvii. 11-15; 
 xxxviii. 4-6), can we doubt that what is said of 
 the pit should be taken literally, especially if we 
 consider the fact that what is here said agrees 
 substantially with what Jeremiah says, chap, 
 xxxviii., of the pit into which he was actually 
 thrown by his enemies? We are sure, therefore, 
 that the Poet here had in his eye the persecutions 
 which Jeremiah suffered from his enemies. He 
 personates Jeremiah. The chief subject of the 
 third song is Jeremiah. 
 
 Ver. 52. Mine enemies chased me sore, 
 like a bird, without cause. — Jlunt^d, hunted 
 have they me like a bird, all inine enemies without 
 cause. Like a bird: see Ps. xi. 1. where the soul 
 of the persecuted innocent is likewise compared 
 
 to a bird. \_They that were without cause mint 
 enemies hunted me down like a bird. So Blatnet 
 and Notes render the verb l^V, which seems to 
 mean, not to hunt, in the abstract sense, but to 
 obtain by hunting, to seize, to lay hold of, and ai 
 used here in an intensive sense, would imply 
 persevering and successful liunting. Dou.\y : 
 My enemies have chased me and caught me like a 
 bird. Hunted me down like a bird expresses the 
 idea suggested by the comparison. — As even a 
 bird is at last tired out and hunted down by a per- 
 severing pursuer. The point of the comparison 
 is the perseverance of the successful hunter in 
 pursuit of a bird : as David says of Saul's tire- 
 less and remorseless pursuit of him, " The King 
 of Israel is come out to seek a flea, as when one 
 doth hunt a partridge in the mountains" (1 Sam. 
 xxvi. 20). This idea is expressed in the Paris 
 ed., 1805, of the French, Ceux qui sont mes 
 ennemis sans cause m'ont poursuivi a outrance, 
 comme on poursuit un oiseau. The French of 
 Martin gives the same sense. The commenta- 
 tors generally fail to er.plain the comparison. 
 Calvin, who supposes tl e lack of " both pru- 
 dence and courage" in birds is referred to, is 
 evidently wrong, both as to the fact that birds 
 are thus deficient, and as to its application here. 
 Both Gesenius and Fuerst explain the verb, 
 ^^V, as used here, in the sense of laying snares as 
 for a bird. This gives a good sense, and carries 
 out the comparison ; but it is adopted by none 
 of the versions, and seems inconsistent with the 
 general use of the verb and the intensive mean- 
 ing suggesteil by the duplication. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 53. They have cut off my life in the 
 dungeon. — They destroyed in the pit my life [i. e., 
 sought to destroy it. See Gram, notes above. 
 From Jer. xxxviii. 4, it is certain that their ob- 
 ject in throwing him into the pit was to kill 
 him. — W. H. H.] — And cast a stone upon 
 me, — and threw stones upon me. But should we 
 translate they threw stones upon me, or they cast a 
 stone over me \i. e., over the mouth of the pit] ? 
 Jer. xxxviii. says notliing of either the one or 
 the other. Yet it is possible that Jeremiah, 
 whose statements in that chapter were confined, 
 with admirable reserve, to the principal circum- 
 stances, might have omitted this point. And it 
 is also possible that the author of our song, in 
 case he were not Jeremiah himself, may have 
 added this particular, eiiher from hearsay, or 
 out of his own invention. [The addition of a 
 new fact affords a strong presumption that Jere- 
 miah wrote this book. One personating him 
 would have adhered to facts well authenticated 
 in his history. — W. H. H.] Grammatically con- 
 
132 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 •idered there is nothing in either the verb or the 
 noun decisive in favor of the one or the other 
 explanation The verb m\ which is used in 
 Joel iv. 3, Ob. 11 ; Nah. iii. 10 of casting the lot, 
 and in Jer. i. 14 of shooting an arrow, Zecha- 
 liah uses ^Iso of throwing down iron [?] horns 
 (ii. 4; E. V. i. 21). The word only occurs in 
 the places cited. But if Zechariah uses the 
 word of throwing down objects of such size and 
 weight, then it could properly be used also of 
 throwing a heavy stone over the opening of the 
 pit. The noun, |3X, further, can as well signify 
 collectively a 7iumber of stones as one stone, for it 
 frequently has that meaning after DjT, Lev xx. 
 2, 27; xxiv 23: Josh, vii 25; 1 Kings xii 18 
 {\2V. U ^OJTI), comp. Num xiv. 10, xv. 35; 
 Deut. xxi. 21. But the preposition, '3, upon me, 
 favors the explanation they cast stoups on me. For 
 the diflFerence between 3 and vX or 7^ is, that 
 the former, as Fuerst says, denotes " decided 
 vicinity," or " such motion as is connected with 
 the attainment of its object," whilst by the latter 
 is expressed "motion toward without nearness." 
 They threw a stone on me, that is to say, over me 
 on the mouth of the pit, would be expressed by 
 
 7^. [Though there is a foundation for this dis- 
 tinction between these two prepositions, yet they 
 are often used indiscriminately, without affect- 
 ing the sense, as for instance with the verbs 
 p3'l, }}!)■ ty^l- 3, too, is used in the general 
 
 sense of over, as with 71^0, in the sense of rulins: 
 
 - T " 
 
 over, or having the management of aifairs, see 
 Ps. ciii. 19; Gen. xxiv. 2; xlv. 8, 26; Deut. xv. 
 6; Judges viii. 22; Josh. xii. 5; 1 Kings v. 1. 
 If the use of 3 here in the sense indicated by 
 E. V. is not absolutely forbidden, it is certainly 
 to be preferred. 1. It would have been a wanton 
 outrage to throw stones upon the Prophet after 
 he was cast into the pit. 2. It seems incredible 
 that Jeremiah should not in his narrative of the 
 affair have mentioned such a remarkable inci- 
 dent, if it had occurred. 3. They could only 
 have thrown the stones for the purpose of killing 
 him, and how then had he escaped death ? 4. The 
 fact that the pit was covered over with a stone, 
 to prevent his possible escape, was a most likely 
 occurrence, and yet one that, because likely and 
 even to be presumed, might have been passed 
 
 over without special mention. Finally, all the 
 versions, except Naegelsbach's and Gerlaoh's, 
 render it as in E. V. ; Gataker indicates both 
 senses without deciding in favor of either. — • 
 W H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 54. Waters flovred over my head. — 
 Waters dashed [surged) over my head. This cannot 
 be meant of the flowing together of the water in 
 a physical sense, over his head. For in Jer. 
 xxxviii. 6, it is expressly said that thei-e was no 
 water in the pit, only mud. Besides, the flowing 
 together of water over his head must iaovitably 
 liave had for its speedy consequence the death of 
 iiim who was thrown into the pit. Either the 
 words mean merely, water ran on my head; or, 
 what is more likely, this way of speaking should 
 be understood as metaphorical, as also in Ps. 
 Ixix. 3 (2), 15 (14), 16 (15), he who is sunk in 
 the mire, speaks at the same time of being 
 drowned by the water-flood. That he intends 
 this as an image descriptive of the greatest peril 
 of death (see Ps. xviii. 17 (16); xxxii. 6; xlii. 
 
 (7); Ixxxviii. 17 (16), 18 (17) ; cxxx. 1 ; cxliv. 
 7), is evident also from Ps. Ixix. 2(1), where/or 
 the waters are come in even to my soul can only be 
 taken in a figurative sense. [In Ps. Ixix. all is 
 figurative. But here, where all the rest is 
 literal, to take one term alone as figurative, is 
 unnatural. It would be better, with Hender- 
 son, to take the whole description as figurative, 
 and as having no direct allusion to the account 
 given in Jer. xxxviii. 6-12. But this is not 
 necessary. The words may only mean Water ran 
 on my head. See Gram, notes above. If there was 
 mud in the bottom of the pit, there was a supply 
 of water in some quantities from some source. 
 The mere condensation of the vapor in the 
 atmosphere against the sides of the pit, would 
 produce some, and there may have been from 
 small springs supply enough to trickle down and 
 splash upon his head. The language, if suggested 
 by any Psalm, was more likely that of xl. 3 (2), 
 tlian of the Ixix. — and brought me up from a pit 
 of noise, and from the miry clay, — where the noise 
 referred to seems to be that of running water; 
 The Prophet, sinking in the mud beneath, and 
 reminded by the water falling on his head that 
 he was in danger of drowning, might well ex- 
 claim / a7n lost, I am already as good as gone ! — 
 W. H. H.]— Then I said, I am cut off,—/ 
 said, I am cut off. Notes: 1 ajti undone. Geb- 
 LACH : I am lost. Comp. Ps. Ixxxviii. 5.] 
 
 III. 65-66. 
 
 I called upon thy name, O Lord, out of the low dungeon. Thou hast heard 
 i my voice ; hide not thine ear at my breathing, at my cry. Thou drewest near 
 
 58 in the day that I called upon thee : thou saidst. Fear not. O Lord, thou hast 
 
 59 pleaded the causes of my soul ; thou hast redeemed my life. O Lord, thou lu^st 
 
 60 seen my wrong; judge thou my cause. Thou hast seen all their vengeance, and 
 
 61 all their imaginations against me. Thou hast heard their reproach, O Lord, 
 and all their imaginations against me. The lips of those that rose up ag-ainst 
 me, and their device against me all the day. Behold their sitting down, and 
 
 55, 56 
 
 K7 
 
 62 
 63 
 
 64 their rising up ; I am their music. Render unto them a recompence, Lord, 
 
CHAP. III. 55-06. isj 
 
 65 according to the work of their hands. Give them sorrow of heart, thy curse 
 
 66 unto them. Persecute and destroy them in anger from under the heavens of the 
 Lord. 
 
 textual and grammatical. 
 
 Ver. 55.— '>" DB' K*1p- This expression does not occur in Jer. ; he nses only once 0' DE^3 S^P. x. 25. [There ii 
 tIt •• : tIt 
 
 not enough difference in the two expressions to afford the shadow of an argument for or against tVi- a'lthorship of Lamen- 
 tations, even if tlie latter expression had been frequent with Jeremiah ; but as in fict it only otcurs ouce, who can say 
 which of the two expressions was characteristic of his style? — W. H. H.] — nmnfl lUO- Ps. Ixxxvii. 7, <P\ 1133. 
 Elsewher ' occir only the expressions fjT h'li, Jos. xv. 19, and ''y\ V^H, Ez. xxvi. 20; xxxii. 18, 24 [in each case in 
 close connection with '^')2- — W. H. H.], or VIX '■H, Is. xliv. 23 ; Ps. Ixiii. 10; cxxxix.15. mTinn is to be regarded ai 
 related to 113 in the genitive, not in the accusative sense. 
 
 Ver. 5G. The verb D7y Jeremiah uses in no form. The expression nj< D'T^ occurs only here. — [Hknderson: " Be- 
 
 fore ^PnT^ 7, the preposition has the signification of wit/i a «te«; to ; before 'nj^lC/i it takes its temporal signification, 
 
 • T : ~ ; . • T : ~ : 
 
 at, at the time of."] — HyiCi once in Jer., viii. 19 ; see ver. 8 ; Ps. xxxiv. 16. 
 
 Ver. 57. 31p Jeremiah uses only once in the Hiphil, xxx. 21. — The Perfects, j13"1p. jTlOX, of this verse and ri3T. 
 
 . -It . t:-'tt:-t t:- 
 
 n7XJ, ver. 58, stand parallel to the Perfect nj.'OiJ' ver. 56. They contain the specifications of that general declaration. 
 
 T : - T T : - T 
 
 They are therefore to be translated in the Perfect, not in the Present. ^X"^pX does not conflict with this, as THENina 
 
 thinks, for the Imperfect stands here to represent tho repetition of the act in times past. See my Gr. ^ 87, f. 
 
 Ver. 58. The expression 3'"^ 3T is found in Jeremiali twice, 1. 34; li. 36. Yet Jeremiah never uses the plural □^3''1, 
 
 T 
 
 which occurs, besides here, only in Ps. xviii. 41 (2 Sam. xxii. 44). [The singular here would be inappropriate, if the mean- 
 ing of the phrase is that God interposed to deliver him from all the causes which endangered his life, see ver. 53. — 'C!/£3 J is 
 not merely a circumlocution for the suffix, my, (Notes), but '1^33 ^3'1 are causse quse vitam ac salutem meam cmicernwni 
 
 (Qbrlach), dangerous transactions (Fuerst's Lex.). — W. H. H.j — Jeremiah uses only the Part. 7><jof 7XJ, and that only 
 
 - T 
 once, 1. 34. See elsewhere, Ps. Ixix. 19 ; ciii. 4 ; cxix. 154. 
 
 Ver. 60. Instead of '7 several Codd. have '7J?, which corresponds better with the way in which Jeremiah expressea 
 himself in xi. 19; xviii. 18 ; but is apparently only a correction suggested by ver. 61. See besides at K3l7, ver. 34. 
 [Henderson : " For '7 twenty-three MSS., originally thirteen more, now two, the LXX., Targ., Syr., Vulg., and Venet. 
 Greek, read '7y as in ver. 61 ; where, on the other hand, seventeen MSS. read "7 for '''7J^."J 
 
 Ver. 61. n3"^n is used here in an active sense, as in Jer. li. 51 ; Job xvi. 10 ; Zeph. ii. 8, etc. — [The difference between 
 '*7T^ of this verse, and ^7 of ver. 60, according to Owen, " is occasioned by the verbs Thou, host seen and Thou hast heard. 
 God had seen the thoughts or purposes effected against him ; and He had heard the purposes formed concerning him. He 
 refers first to the purposes carried into effect, and then, as it is common in the prophets, he refers to the purposes previously 
 formed respecting him." This difference of meaning in the two verses is, however, entirely due to the verbs, and not at all 
 to the prepositions, which would even better express the ideas Owen attaches to them if their positions were reversed, — 
 hare seen their devices executed 7I' upon me, and heard their devices devised 7 with reference to me. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 62. — [This verse may be dependent on nVDK' ver. 61, Gerlach and most of the translators ; or on ntO'SH vea 
 
 T : - T ■ T ■ - 
 
 63, Thenics, NAEaELSBACH. To supply the substantive verb VHi sunt, before '717, as Eosenmuelleb suggests, is altogether 
 
 T - T , 
 
 unnecessary and inelegant. — W. H. H.]. — D'Op, for enemies, is found in Jeremiah only in the expression 'Op 3 /> li- !• — 
 {Vjn is not found in Jeremiah ; [nor anywhere else except Ps. ix. 17 ; xix. 15 ; xcii. 4. It is an unusual word on which no 
 theory of authorship can be rested. — W. II. II.] 
 
 Ver. 63.— nrD'p is found only here. — ntO'SH, see i. 11. — nj^JJO is aw. Acyd/u.. [Gerlach: " The opinion of Boettchkb 
 T I T ■ - T • : - 
 
 deserves at least some consideration, that here as in Mai. i. 13, there lies concealed in the O a HO (quam, quak; what a 
 
 Saitenspiel [derisive song"] 1 am to them). But this is not in accordance with the punctuation and receives support from none 
 
 of the versions except the Syr. See Ps. Ixxxix. 48."] 
 
 Ver. G4. — '7IOJ 3''iyn is found in Ps. xxviii. 4; xciv. 2 ; Joel iv. 4, 7; Oh. 15; Prov. xii. 14. In Jeremiah occurs 
 
 only "710J U/'^, li- 0- — DrfT PIE'^OS is found in Jer. xxv. 14 (a place critically suspicious), Ps. xxviii. 4. 
 
 Ver. 65. — H^JD is an. Aeydji. [Beoughton translates it a bursting of heart, following Chald^us, K37 niT3ni 
 T • : T • • : 
 
 confractio cordis. Blatney derives the word from Piel of t J*3. to deliver or make over ; "a delivery of the heart, that is, a 
 
 willing one, to which the heart consents ;" and translates, omitting the first DH 7 on the authority of the ancient versions 
 
 V T 
 
 and one MS., and making a single member of the verse in defiance of accents and analogy. Thou wilt give with a hearty 
 accor'iance Thy curse unto them. Sept. virepdiritrnov, covering ; Vulo. scutum, a shield ; Syr. sorrow. — W. H. H.]. — D /XD, 
 from bSx, a curse, is ait. Keyoix. [Sept. and Vulg. seem to have read HxSn from TMir- For construction see Ps. iii. 9. 
 
 - T 1 TT : TT 
 
 ''in3'13 ^T^}?'}? super populo tuo sit benedictio tua. Rosenmueller, Gerl.wh.— W. II. H.] 
 
 Ver. 66. — <'\X\ Hlljl. See i. 6; Isa. xiv. 6; Jer. xxi. 15.— Of the root IDK? Jeremiah UJes only the Niphal, xlriii, 
 8, 42.— The expression *•" 'Dty is found only here. 
 
134 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Vers. 55-66. These twelve closing verses con- 
 tain a prayer, so that ch. iii., like chs. i. and ii., 
 ends with a prayer. This prayer is divided into 
 three parts. In the first part, vers. 55-58, the 
 speaker thanks the Lord for his deliverance from 
 the pit. In the second part, vers. 59-63, he 
 reminds the Lord of all that his (the speaker's) 
 enemies had done and were still doing to him. 
 In the third part, vers. 64-66, he prays the Lord 
 to avenge upon his enemies the evil they had 
 done to him. 
 
 Ver 55. I called upon thy name, O LORD 
 — Jehovah. The speaker begins by recalling the 
 prayer which he had addressed to the Lord out 
 of the pit. HiTZiG is of the opinion that we 
 have this prayer in Ps. Ixix. Dehtzsch also 
 concedes that there is much to favor this opinion ; 
 see his Bible Commentary on the Psalms, 1867, 
 p. 438. [The caption of this Psalm ascribes it 
 to David. There is no internal evidence suffi- 
 cient to set this aside and to prove that the Psalm 
 was written by Jeremiah or some one else 
 '• during the captivity at Babylon." Its appro- 
 priateness to Jeremiah when in the pit, is only a 
 proof of the singular adaptation of the inspired 
 psalms to the wants of God's children in all 
 varieties of emergencies and circumstances. 
 That Jeremiah repeated this Psalm when in the 
 pit, is most likely. That it was present to his 
 mini when writing these Lamentations is ren- 
 dered probable by many suggestive thoughts and 
 gentiments. — Gerlach and Noyes translate the 
 verbs, from ver. 55 to the end, in the present 
 tense. This makes the translation in some re- 
 spects smoother and the sense in some places 
 more apparent. But the references are to de- 
 liverances past, pointing hopefully, amidst pre- 
 sent and unrelieved afflictions, to deliverances 
 yet in the future. For this reason alone, the 
 preterite sense of the verbs should be retained, 
 even if the difficulties of translation were greater 
 than they really are.— W. H. H.].— Out of the 
 low dungeon — out of the hellish {hiJUtschen) pit. 
 A similar expression [differing only in the pre- 
 position. — W. H. H.] is found in Ps. Ixxxviii. 7. 
 If our Poet had in mind Ps. Ixxxviii., which I 
 regard as certain, then it is probable that he 
 used this peculiar expression in the same sense 
 in which it is used there. Ps. Ixxxviii., it is 
 true, is commonly understood of an affliction of 
 another kind (by leprosy, vers. 9, 16) : but there 
 is room for the question, whether this psalm. 
 "the gloomiest of all the lamentation psalms," 
 as Dklitzscii says, does not also apply to that 
 gloomiest of all situations which any servant of 
 the Lord in the Old Testament ever experienced? 
 la that case DTrinn, hellish, should be under- 
 stood, not of Hades itself, but of the Hades-like 
 place in which the Prophet found himself. It 
 would then indicate not merely tlie locality, but 
 the condition of the Prophet. [See Gram, notes 
 above. There is not necessarily in these woi-ds 
 an allusion to Sheol, nor is hellish pit even a 
 correct translation of the words, which mean 
 literally, a pit of low or under places, or pit of 
 depths ; out of the depths of the pit, if not an exact 
 
 is yet a sufiBciently accurate rendering. Gbr- 
 LACH, while he also supposes an allusion, in a 
 figurative sense, to Sheol, translates, aus der 
 Grube der Tiefen, out of the pit of the depths, mean- 
 ing perhaps, figuratively, the infernal regions. 
 But the passages in which this and similar ex- 
 pressions occur do not justify the idea that the 
 pit of Hell or Sheol, /. e. the place of the dc.id. is 
 intended, even figuratively. The literal sense 
 out of the jiit of depths, a, \)oq\\c.i.\ expression for 
 depths of the pit, is ino^t consonant with the fact 
 that the Prophet alludes to the time when he was 
 literally sinking in the mire at the bottom of the 
 well.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 56. Thou hast heard my voice, ^ 
 Thou heardest my voice. The Poet gratelnlly re- 
 cognizes the fact that the Lord heard his cry, — 
 Hide not thine ear at my breathing, at my 
 cry, — [saying] Side not Thine ear to my refresh- 
 ment, to my cry. This is not a prayer wliich the 
 speaker noio addresses to the Lord [but the 
 prayer which he did make when he was in the 
 
 pit]. It is connected with '/''P' ^V ''^^ice, as an 
 explanation of the purport of that cry, and it 
 shows what the speaker prayed for at that time. 
 — The word Hnn [E. V. breathing, Naeqelsb. 
 refreshmenti occurs besides here only in Ex. viii. 
 11 (15) [and is there rendered by Sept. di'di/'uf^f], 
 signifies undoubtedly the obtaining breath, nvd- 
 ifw^cg (see 1 Sam. xvi. 23; Job xxxii. 20; Esth. 
 iv. 14). It is not synonymous with Pj^lKf, cry, 
 but it denotes the end to which the latter serves 
 as the means. [The sense is, as given by Noves : 
 Hide not Thine ear from my cry for relief. But a 
 more exact translation is given byBLAYNEv: 
 Hide not Thine ear from my relief at my cry ; — 
 so Broughton : Hide not Thine ear from my re- 
 lease at my yrayrr. The verb means strictly to 
 veil (and is so rendered here by Gerlach, Veil 
 not Thine ear), and then to conceal, hide. "To 
 veil the eye is, not to look at what is set before 
 it; and to veil the ear is, to render it deaf to 
 what is said;" remarks Owen, who proposes the 
 translation Deafen not Thine ear. Fuerst, in his 
 Lex., says, Tur7i not away Thine ear. Calvin 
 renders it, Close not Thine ear. — My breathing. 
 Wordsworth: "My respiration, my recovery 
 of breath. Comp. Ex. viii. 15, the only other 
 place where the word occurs, and where it is 
 rendered re.tpite." The word relief seems in ac- 
 cordance with the use of the word in that pas- 
 sage, and exactly to represent the sense it has 
 here. — But how are these last words connected 
 with the first words of the verse ? The difficulty 
 wliich has embarrassed commentators here, is 
 one of Gerlach's arguments for taking the per- 
 fect verbs in a precative sense and rendering 
 tliem in the present, which apparently meets the 
 difficulty. But the objections to this have been 
 stated above on ver. 55. To supply intermedi- 
 ate words and thoughts between the first and 
 second members of the verse, as Thou heardest 
 my voice, therefore now, in my present exigency, 
 hide not Thine ear, etc., or therefore I now am en- 
 couraged to pray Hide, not, etc., is at least arbi- 
 trary.* To regard the last member as indepcn- 
 
 * DiODATi's comment on thi? verse ia an instance of inter- 
 pretation, where a fervid imagination sniiplii^ ideas not cou- 
 
CHAP. III. 55-e 
 
 135 
 
 dent of the first, an interjectional prayer, intro- 
 duces an abrupt and serious break in the 
 consecutive flow of the thought. Besides, both 
 of these interpretations are open to the objection 
 
 that r\}?D\if f^p, Thou heardest my voice, is not 
 equivalent to saying, Thou didst answer my prayer, 
 or receive it favorably ; a mistake that even Ger- 
 
 LACH has fallen into. The word ^1p denotes any 
 audible sound or noise. Thunder (1 Sam. vii. 
 10), the blast of a trumpet (Ex. xix. 19), the crack- 
 ling of thorns under a pot (Eccl. vii. 6), the 
 rustling of a shaken leaf [hey. xxvi. 36), the sing- 
 ing of birds (Ps. civ. 12), the bleating of sheep and 
 lowing of oxen (1 Sam. xv. 14), the roaring of a 
 lion (Jer. xii. 8), the shout of a multitude and 
 clamor of a battle (Ex. xxxii. 17), etc., the sound 
 of the human voice in speaking, singing, weep- 
 ing, etc., are all represented by the common 
 
 generic word /1p, a sound, a noise. In three 
 passages the word is used in the sense of rumor, 
 or the bruit of common fame: Gen. xlv. 16; 
 Eccl. X. 20; Jer. iii. 9. When connected by 3 
 
 or 7 to verbs implying compliance with a request, 
 obedience to a command, acceptance of advice, or the 
 like, usage allows the word to stand in a specific 
 sense for prayer, command, injunction, or the like; 
 
 as Gen. xxx. 6, ^''pr' V^^^ hath heard my voire, 
 i. e. my prayer. In no other case does this word, 
 alone and by itself, signify a command, prayer, 
 or speech, or words spoken. It does not desig- 
 nate articulate utterance, but the sound produced 
 by speech, or aught else that makes a noise, or 
 is audible. Its meaning is always evolved from 
 the context, and when spoken words are intended, 
 
 it is almost invariably followed by "IDN, 'T'O?, or 
 some similar word. Its use in Hebrew is so 
 purely idiomatic, that the sense may often be 
 better given in English by its entire omission, 
 than by a verbally literal translation. This is 
 often done in our English version : Gen. xlv. 2, 
 he -wept aloud; 1 Kings xviii. 27, cry aloud, ver. 
 28, they cried aloud ; Neb. viii. 15, publish and pro- 
 claim; Job xxix. 10, The nobles held their peace; 
 Prov. xxvi. 25, when he speaketh fair, etc. In 
 Cant. ii. 8; v. 2 (see Prof. Green in Lange), 
 and Isa. xl. 3, 6 (see Ewald), the word may bo 
 rendered as an interjection. Hark ! It is obvious, 
 
 therefore, that 7ip cannot be translated prayer. 
 'Vlp nj^iDiy can only mean Thou heardest the sound 
 of my voice. What that sound was, whether of 
 weeping, lamentation or supplication, is left to 
 be explained, and is explained by the words 
 following ; the sound, or cry was. Hide not Thine 
 ear from my prayer for relief. Similar construc- 
 tions are frequent, especially with Jeremiah. 
 Jer. iii. 21, a sound ivas heard upo7i /he high places 
 — iveeping supplications; iv. 31, The cry of the 
 daughter of Zion — ivoe is me now ! etc.; viii. 19, 
 The voice of the daughter of my people — Is not Je- 
 hovah in Zion? etc.; see Jer. xxxi. 15; Ez. iii. 
 12, I heard a voice — Blessed be the glory of Jeho- 
 
 tained in the words themselves: "Thou hast always heen 
 ready to relieve ine when I have called upon Thee ; con- 
 tinue in doing so now at this present." 
 
 vah, etc.; Job xxxiii. 8, 9, I have heard the cry of 
 words — 1 am clean, etc.; iv. 16, 17, I heard a voice 
 — shall mortal man, etc.; Ps. cxvi. 1, He hath heard 
 my voice — my supplications; cxix. 149, Hear my 
 cry — Jehovah quicken me, etc. See Isa. xxviii. 23, 
 24; xxxii. 9, 10; Prov. viii. 4, 5; Micah vi. 1, 
 2 ; Prov. i. 20, 22 ; viii. 1, 4, 5. In all these 
 
 passages the woi-d 7lp is immediately put into 
 expository words. So in our text, the second 
 member of the verse is in ai^position with the 
 
 first and explanatory of the word 7lp, Thou 
 heardest my cry — Hide not Thine ear from my 
 prayer for relief. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 57. The Poet now describes what the 
 Lord did after hearing the prayer of the suppli- 
 ant. — Thou dre^vest near in the day that 
 — on the day lohen — I called upon Thee. See 
 Ps. XX. 10; Ivi. 10; cii. 3; cxxxviii. o. — Thou 
 saidst, Pear not. See Jer. i. 8; xxx. 10; 
 xlvi. 27, 28. 
 
 Ver. 58. The Lord has not only spoken, but 
 also acted. [Vers. 57, 58 are amplifications of 
 ver. 56, showing how the Lord heard the pruyer 
 there recorded. — W. H. H.]. — O Lord, thou 
 hast pleaded the causes of my soul. — Thou 
 hast fought, Lord, the fights of my soul! It is 
 evident that the Poet intends by these conflicts 
 (O'l'l) the attacks of his enemies, which he has 
 j described in vers. 52-55, and for which, from 
 ver. 59 onward, he implores vengeance. That 
 the struggles on which his life depended were 
 severe, appears both from vers. 52-55 and from 
 the following words Thou hast rescued my life. 
 [The Versions generally take the words in the 
 judicial sense, as in our English Bibles. The 
 commentators fail to explain the significance of 
 the metaphor. Pool's annotation is a curious 
 instance of blindly unsaying in the note what is 
 said in the text, — " Thou hast been wont to take 
 my part against my enemies, not like a lawyer 
 by word of mouth, but actually and really plead- 
 ing my cause." Pleading a cause, metaphori- 
 cally speaking, must at least involve the idea of 
 securing justification, or exemption from pun- 
 ishment, before some legal tribunal, real or 
 imaginary. This idea is not appropriate here, 
 nor is it so in other places of the Bible where 
 the same Hebrew words are similaily translated. 
 This leads us to doubt the judicial interpreta- 
 tion of the terms used. Dr. Naegelsbach's 
 translation is supported by Is. xlix. 25, / will 
 contend with him, that contendeth tvilh thee, and 1 
 will save thy children; xli. 11, they that strive icith 
 thee shall perish ; xxxiv. 8, the controversy of Zion ; 
 Ps. XXXV. 1, E. v.. Plead my cause, LORD, 
 ivith them that strive with me : fight against them 
 that fight against me, where the first clause is ren- 
 dered by Dr. Alexander, Oppose my opposers, 
 strive u'ith my strivers, or contend with my con- 
 tenders, which is recommended by the parallel- 
 ism ; and Jer. li. 36, E. V., 1 will plead thy catis ■ 
 and take vengeance for thee, which Dr. Naegel.*- 
 bach translates, / fight thy fight, and avenge thy 
 vengeance. But the words may have another 
 meaning still. 3^"^ has an acquired sense, from 
 the itlea oi conducting a cause before a tribunal, of 
 managing another^s affairs, and also of protecting 
 their person, property and rights. In this sense the 
 
136 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 word seems to be used in Is. i. 17, E. V., plead 
 for the widow. J. A. Ale.xander : ^'■Befriend the 
 widow, take her part, espouse her cause. * * 
 The common version {plead for the widow) seems 
 to apply too exclusively to advocates, as dis- 
 tinguished from judges ;" — a remark that will 
 especially apply in the present case. The word 
 seems to have the same sense in Is. li. 22, and 
 Jer. 1. 34. In the last the expression is 3'T 3'7 
 D3''"^~nX, E. V. : He shall thoroughly plead their 
 cause, Luther and Naegelsbach, He will cer- 
 tainly accomplish, or carry through (durchfiihren) 
 thy cause, where the idea seems to be that of 
 zealously and successfully prosecuting the in- 
 terests of another. This is the meaning which 
 Gerlach adopts. Thou managest the business of 
 my soul, i. e., as he explains, the affairs which 
 concern his life and his salvation. This idea of 
 God's controlling interposition in those matters 
 in which the Prophet's life was in jeopardy seems 
 to me the idea here expressed. — W. H. H.] — 
 Thou hast redeemed my life. — Thou hast 
 rescued my life. [The propriety of connecting 
 this verse with vers. 5.5-57, instead of with vers. 
 59, 60, and thus dismembering the triplets, is 
 very dubious. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Vers. 59-68. These verses embrace, as re- 
 marked above, the second part of the prayer. 
 The speaker here reminds the Lord of all the evil 
 which he had suffered from his enemies, as the 
 Lord Himself had seen and heard, and prays 
 Him (vers. 62, 63) to consider well what his ene- 
 mies yet continually designed against him. These 
 verses contain a brief intimation of the prayer 
 which he presents at large in vers. 64-66, that 
 the Lord would execute justice (ver. 59). 
 
 Ver. 59. LORD — Jehovah — thou hast seen. 
 — By these words, which are repeated in ver. 60, 
 and the words Thou hast heard in ver. 61, the 
 speaker confirms the reality of the deeds of which 
 he accuses his adversaries. [They are also to be 
 understood as expressions of faith in God's love, 
 and personal interest in His saints. Not only is 
 evei-ything open to the eye and ear of God. But 
 He is observing the conduct and the language of 
 those who injure His people, with jealous indig- 
 nation, which will eventually break out in judg- 
 ments. — W. H. H.] — Mywrong. The Hebrew 
 word nn^i', occurs only here, but the verb from 
 
 TT- " 
 
 which it is derived is found in ver. 36, H^J^. If 
 the latter is used in the sense of bending [de- 
 flection, subversion] and in particular of bending 
 of the right [subverting one in his cause], then 
 the noun here means, violation of right, injury 
 illegally done to one. [Calvin and Gerlach 
 translate the word oppression, or subversion, sug- 
 gesting judicial perversion of justice. It is gene- 
 rally, however, taken in the more general sense 
 of wrong or injury. Calvin says "the word is 
 rendered by some iniquity, but in an ironical 
 sense," i.e., the wrong my enemies impute to me. 
 But the word is with almost entire unanimity 
 takon in a passive sense. Rosenmuelleii: qiue 
 mihi fiat injuria. Noyes : the icrong done to me ; 
 so Ijlayney and Boothuoyd. — W. H. H.]. — 
 Judge thou my cause— Judge my right. [So 
 Broughton. Gkrlacu : Secure to me right or Jus- 
 tice. Literally, it is Judge my Judgment, where the 
 aoun seems to be taken in the cognate sense of 
 
 my cause. See Fuerst, Lex. Notes : Maintain 
 Thou my cause. — W. H. H.] These words are a 
 pious ejaculation, anticipatory of the prayer fully 
 detailed in vers. 64-66, and evidently called forth 
 by the antithesis of ''^^^, my wrong. To judge 
 the right of a man is to bring it to its deserts bj 
 means of judgment. A kindred passage is Jer. 
 V. 28. Comp. Zech. vii. 9; 1 Kings iii. 28; Is. 
 xvi. 5. [See also Ps. ix. 5 (4).] 
 
 Ver. 60. Thou hast seen all their ven- 
 geance. — The word HDpJ is not in its original 
 meaning vindictiveness, as Thenius supposes, but 
 simply ultio [^taking vengeance'] (comp. W\ riOp^' 
 
 Ps. Ixxix. 10, 1^.D'n nopJ, Jer. 1. 28, n'lDp^J Sn, 
 Ps. xciv. 1, etc.). Here also it is vengeance, but 
 in an abstract-collective signification, inasmuch 
 as his adversaries had executed on the Prophet 
 more than one single act of vengeance. See xi. 
 20; XX. 12. [Calvin: vengeances. Gerlach: 
 revengefulness.] — And all their imaginations 
 against me — all their devices against mr. Tlio 
 Poet seems to allude to certain passages in Jere- 
 miah, namely, xi. 19; xviii. 18, where this vuy 
 
 same word, niK'no, is emphatically used of the 
 machinations of his adversaries. 
 
 Ver. 61. Thou hast heard their reproach 
 — reviling — O LORD — Jehovah. See the intro- 
 ductory remarks above on vers. 22-24. — And 
 all their imaginations — all their devices — 
 against me. — Twice in the Book of Jeremiah 
 the devices, fll^E'rirs, of his adversaries are spoken 
 of; twice also the Poet uses it here. 
 
 Ver. 62. It is better every way to refer this 
 verse to the Behold or observe, HD'Sn, of ver. 63, 
 than to the, JiyotJ?, Thou hast heard, of ver. 61. 
 
 T : - T 
 
 For if referred to what precedes, ver. 62 would 
 contain a tautology, because what is the product 
 of their lips and their thoughts must be, in any 
 case, substantially the same with what the Lord 
 has heard according to ver. 61. But if ver. 62 
 be referred to what follows then we gain a 
 beautiful gradation ; the lips indicate what the 
 enemies speak, DJVjn, their meditation, what they 
 think, and their sitting down and their rising up, 
 what they do. [The position of the word Behold, 
 HD'Sn, in the Hebrew, at the end of the first 
 member of ver. 63, favors this construction. Yet 
 it ought to be remarked, that the connection of 
 ver. 62 with ver. 61, creates no unpleasant tauto- 
 logy but the repetition of the same ideas under new 
 terms would be forcible and poetical — W. H. H.] 
 — The lips stand for what they utter. [Cal- 
 vin, Boothroyd, Henderson, translate speeches; 
 Noyes, words.] See |^J3 ^^^■> ^P^t or languagt 
 oj Canaan, Is. xix. 18 ; a lip or language I under- 
 stood not, Ps. Ixxxi. 6 (5). Compare 'HiJ'f N}flD 
 utterance of my lips, Jer. xvii. 16. — Of those 
 that rose up against me — my adversaries [so 
 Blayney, Boothkoyi), Noyes, Rosenmueller, 
 Gerlach]. — And their device against me — 
 and their thoughts against me. Thoughts, ^JH, 
 meditation, Ps. xix. 15 (14). [Blayney, Booth- 
 royd and Owen, render the word muttering. 
 Henderson and Noyes, machinations. But the 
 sense of meditation, thoughts, is adopted generally. 
 
CHAP. III. 55-C6. 
 
 137 
 
 RosENMUELLER, coffitotio. — W. H. H.] — All the 
 day lonff: a particular conspicuous also in Jer. 
 XX. 7, 8. 
 
 Ver. 63. Behold their sitting down and 
 their rising up. — To refer these words, with 
 TuKNius merely to consessus [sitting and delibera- 
 ting together] of the enemies, is inconsistent with 
 the context and the use of the words. For evi- 
 dently, according to the context, the Lord should 
 observe the whole conduct and doing of the ene- 
 mies, and that not merely with regard to what 
 was common to them all, but with respect to in- 
 dividuals. And further, according to the usage 
 of the word, as apparent in such places as Ps. 
 cxxxix. -; Is. xxxvii. 28: Deut. vi. 7; xi. 19, 
 the expression indicates the daily conduct and 
 actions of a man. [Grotius : otia et negotia. 
 Calvin: " By sitting and rising, he means all the 
 actions of life, as when David says, • Thou 
 knowest my sitting and my rising,' Ps. cxxxix. 
 2 ; that is, whether I rest or walk, all my actions 
 are known to Thee, ^y rising, then, the Prophet 
 denotes here, as David did, all the movements or 
 doings of men ; and by sitting, he means their 
 quiet counsels; for men either deliberate and 
 prepare for work while they sit or rise, and thus 
 move and act."] — I am their music — song. See 
 ver. 14. He calls himself their song, their sing- 
 song (Ew.\ld), because they busy themselves with 
 him all the day long, though in a malevolent and 
 scornful way. As one often hums a melody to 
 himself all day long, so they do not let the 
 thought of the hated servant of God depart out 
 of their heads, but are constantly devising evil 
 against him. I am their song denotes, then, the 
 result of what is said in the first member of 
 ver. 62 \_Thou hast heard their reproach'^, and the 
 iirst member of ver. 63 \_ohserve the lips — the lan- 
 guage — of my enemies'], and relates to the all the 
 day long, of ver. 62, and their sitting doivn and 
 rising up, of ver. 63. [I am the constant subject 
 of their derision and merriment. Wordsworth: 
 "Compare the Passion Psalm, Ixix. 12, I was the 
 song of the drunkards. There the word nrgi/iah 
 is used, here the cognate word manginah." — W. 
 H. H.] 
 
 Vers. 64-66. In these last three verses, the 
 Poet prays directly that the Lord would take ven- 
 geance on his enemies according to their desert. 
 
 Ver. 04. Render unto them a recom- 
 pense, O LORD — Jehovah. — according to 
 the work of their hands. [Broughton: 
 "St. Paul 'ranslateth this verse against Alexan- 
 der, the copper-smith, 2 Tim. iv. 14." The phrase 
 is borrowed from Ps. xxviii. 4. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 65. Give themsorrow (marg., o/j.s-^wacy) 
 of heart, l^hou icilt give them blindness of heart. 
 The word rendered blindness, HiJO. according to 
 the fundamentat idea of the root |J3, to enclose, 
 to veil (see |J' HiJ, |J0), can only mean veiling, 
 covering [mAvfiua tF/q KafuVag, veil of the heart, 2 
 Cor. iii. 15). It seems then that blindness [Cal- 
 vin, RosENMUELLER, NoYES, Gerlach], Tiot hard- 
 ness [BooTHROYD, Henderson], is meant. See 
 Deut. xxviii. 28. On what Delitzsch {Psychol., 
 p. 291 ) grounds his conjecture, that it may be a 
 name for madness, 1 do not comprehend. [The 
 opinion that the word means madness is derived 
 from the Arabic, and is maintained by C. B. 
 
 Michaelis and A. Schultens. See Rosen- 
 MUELLER, Gerlach. See Text, and Gram, notes. 
 — By blindness of heart we are to understand a 
 reprobate mind, involving the idea of stupidity 
 (Calvin) produced by sin. — If the future verbs 
 in vers. 54, 56, are taken as Imperatives, the verb 
 in this verse should also be so translated. Give 
 them blindness of heart — W. H. H.] — Thy curse 
 unto them, — upoii them. 
 
 Ver. 66. Persecute and destroy them in 
 auger — Pursue (hem m wrath and exterminate them 
 — from under the Heavens of the LORD — 
 Jehovah. See Deut. ix. 14, which place seems 
 to have been in the eye of the author. [Calvin, 
 regarding the Heavens as designating God's 
 throne, interprets the meaning to be that their 
 destruction should testify the Divine sovereignty 
 and Providence. So Fausset: "destroy them so, 
 that it may be seen everywhere under heaven that 
 Thou sittest above as .Judge of the world." This 
 is very forced. The idea is simply that of utter 
 extermination; destroy them so completely, ut 
 non sint amplius sub ccelis, that they may no longer 
 exist under Heaven. Michaelis, Gerlach. — 
 Broughton concludes the chapter with the fol- 
 lowing characteristic note: "Jeremy, ch. xxiv., 
 told how the men of the third captivity should 
 come to nothing. And Ezekiel prophesied only 
 in their days, but they would fake no warning. 
 This threefold alphabet endefh in their threefold 
 and absolute destruction. Yet Ezra was of that 
 captivity; but an infant. And of Anathoth, 
 cursed by Jeremy, one hundred and twenty-eight 
 returned, Ezra ii." — The enemies of Jeremiah 
 returned not.— W. H. H.] 
 
 DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 
 
 1. ["It has been alleged, that some of the pro- 
 phetic portions of Holy Scripture which foretell 
 the sufferings of Christ, especially the fifty-third 
 chapter of Isaiah and the sixty-ninth Psalm, have 
 no reference to Jesus of Nazareth, but were ful- 
 filled in the person of Jeremiah. True it is, that 
 the language of that fifty-third chapter of Isaiah, 
 and of that sixty-nintii P-^alm. had a remarkable 
 applicability to Jeremiah. But why was this ? 
 Because Jeremiah was not only a prophet, but a 
 prophecy. Jeremiah is among the prophets what 
 .lob is among the patriarchs. Jeremiah is the 
 suffering propiiet. He was a signal type of 'the 
 Man of Sorrows.' He was a figure of Him who 
 suffered on the cross, and who conquered by suf- 
 fering." Wordsworth, Intr. Jer., p. ix. "Jere- 
 miah is called by the Christian Fathers the 
 7ro/.w7rai?f(T-«rof of tlie Prophets, and this qualified 
 him to be what he is also called by them, theaty/Ta- 
 i?e(T7arr»f . " lb. note. "The Christian church, 
 from ancient days, has set apart the Lamenta- 
 tions of Jeremiah, for her own solemn offices in 
 the week of her Lord's Passion ; and in con- 
 templating the Prophet Jeremiah sitting amid 
 the ruins of Zion and pouring out his sorrow 
 there in piteous cries of agony, she has ever had 
 a vision of Christ hanging upon the Cross, and 
 mourning over the ruins of our fallen human na- 
 ture, which caused the bitterest pangs of His 
 anguish there." V)., p. x.] 
 
 2. "In this chapter, the heralds of the word 
 are admonished, that it is their duty, in times of 
 
15?8 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 great ilisiress, to prescribe to their hearers a 
 suitable remedy for their misfortunes, the com- 
 ponent parts of which would be, 1. The recogni- 
 tion of sins by means of the punishments inHicled : 
 -. Confidence in God's compassion: 3. Earnest 
 prayer. As for the rest, this chapter compared 
 with the others, shines like a star of exceeding 
 brilliancy, from which the rays of a variety of 
 doctrines emanate and give forth their light." 
 
 FORSTER. 
 
 3. [I am the man, ver. 1. "This Lamenta- 
 tion is only rightly understood, when it is re- 
 garded as a lamentation of every pious Israelite, 
 — as a lamentation which, while proceeding from 
 self-experienced spiritual sorrows of the Pro- 
 phet, has its truth for all pious Israelites, in 
 whose name the Prophet speaks. Aben Ezra, 
 long ago, perceived this, and indicated the indi- 
 vidual Israelites as the subject of the lamenta- 
 tion. In this opinion later commentators mostly 
 concur (Rosenmueller, Ewald, Thenius, Neu- 
 mann, Vaihinger). Ewald finely says, in con- 
 nection with the close of chapter second, which 
 is so barren of consolation: ' Yet, will lamenta- 
 tion and despair nowhere end? Then, there 
 suddenly appears, in the third place, a particular 
 man ; the very one who can, from his own pecu- 
 liar experience, lament most profoundly, so that 
 here for the third time the cry of despair is 
 renewed with still greater vehemence; but he is 
 the one who can also, from his own profoundest 
 reflection on the eternal relation of God to hu- 
 manity, come to a right knowledge of his own 
 sins and of the necessity of repentance, and 
 therewith also to the exercise of believing prayer. 
 Who is this individual, who thus laments, thus 
 thinks and prays? — whose / unconsciously, but 
 at exactly the right place, passes over into the 
 we ? man, he is the representative of thine own 
 self! Let every one now speak and think as he 
 does! And thus, by the direct means of tliis 
 speech, begun with the greatest difiiculty, the 
 sense of pain has been imperceptibly lost in the 
 exercise of prayer. Thus this composition shows 
 us how in the wildest whirlpool, divine compo- 
 sure is to be won : each one must win it by 
 sinking down himoolf into the full earnest truth ; 
 and even if one does not immediately find it, 
 yet there is no more likely beginning for some- 
 thing better ; wherefore here a particular indi- 
 vidual is set before us as accomplishing in 
 himself this most necessary work ' In this 
 individualizing lies also the explanation of the 
 7nanit'ol<l points of * resemblance between our 
 chapter and the Book of .loh, from the passion- 
 jii-srory of which the PropJiet derives lamenta- 
 i.o.isau'l images tor the representation of the 
 jiassionliisiory of Israel." Dr. Ernst Gerlach, 
 Kfa,;. ./«■.. p. 81]. 
 
 4. Vers. 1-18. " Here we have, at first, a lamen- 
 tation of the Prophet Jeremiah, not so much 
 over his people, as rather over his own miserj'. 
 . . . Here we see, that the pious are subjected to 
 two ditterent sorts of affliction. One of these is 
 temporal, affecting the body or worldly posses- 
 sions and welfare ; the otiier is spiritual, affect- 
 ing the soul, when they think, that God has be- 
 come their enemy, and will no longer be gracious 
 to them, but will reject them now and forever. 
 The first is, in truth, a cause of much suffering, 
 
 especially to flesh and blood; but this pain is 
 nothing, compared with that spiritual tempta- 
 tion, when one can no longer confide in the favor 
 and grace of God, as we here see in the case of 
 Jeremiah, who so ruefully bemoans himself, that 
 he is a wretched man, who must bear the rod of 
 the wrath of God, who has thrust him out of tha 
 light into the darkness, and pursued him as a bear 
 or a lion, or as a more open and declared enemy. 
 David also experienced many of the same temp- 
 tations, as we find ever and anon in his Psalms. 
 Thine arrows stick fast in me, and Thy hand 
 presses me sore, he says in Ps. xxxviii. 3 (2). 
 I said in my despair, I am cut off from before 
 the eyes of the Lord, Ps. xxxi. 23 (22) : whilst 
 at other times he had been so courageous, that 
 he said, I was not afraid of many hundred thou- 
 sands that set themselves against me round 
 about, Ps. iii. 7 (6); God is our refuge and 
 strength, a very present help in trouble ; there- 
 fore will not we fear, though the earth be re- 
 moved, Ps. xlvi. 2, 3 (1, 2). This sounds very 
 difl"erently from the lamentation here of Jere- 
 miah, who represents God as his worst enemy. 
 This should, first of all, serve to comfort the 
 pious; if they fall into similar temptations, they 
 should not think that they are the first to whom 
 such things have happened, but should know 
 that many pious and holy persons have experi- 
 enced the same trials. But to the ungodly, this 
 should serve as a warning; they should consider, 
 if this is done in a green tree, what will be done 
 in the dry? (Luke xxiii. 81). If the righteous 
 are scarcely saved, where will the ungodly and 
 sinner appear? (1 Pet. iv. 7)." W'drtemb. Sum- 
 viarien. 
 
 5. Vers. 1-9. " Jeremiah speaks here in hig 
 own name, and whilst he utters the grief of his 
 own heart he seeks by his example to excite 
 others to repentance, for the key-note that sounds 
 through all his lamentations is, that his distress 
 comes from God. The greatest cause of distress 
 is this, that prayer, the only resource in misery, 
 avails no more. Elsewhere it is said, ■ The name 
 of the Lord is a strong fortress, the righteous 
 man runneth thither and is protected,' — and, 
 ' He who will call on the name of the Lord shall 
 be blessed,' — or, ' Call on Me in trouble, then 
 will I deliver thee, then tliou shalt praise Me.' 
 In truth, the Holy Scriptures are crowded with 
 testimonies, which promise answers to prayer 
 and help to the prayerful ; indeed, since one of 
 the titles of God is ' He who heareth prayer,' it 
 is evident that to hear prayer is founded iu His 
 eternal nature. What then the Prophet here 
 says is contrary to Scripture. But it is true, and 
 so we must understand Jeremiah, that God not 
 seldom hears the prayers of believers, whilst He 
 proves their patience and leaves them long in 
 darkness and uncertainty. This has been, as it 
 was with .Jeremiah, ihe common exp n'ieuce of 
 Christians, who have been obliged to observe in 
 themselves, how quickly the human heart loses 
 courage and prayerful ardor, when God does not 
 hasten to our help." Heim und Hofmann, die 
 qronsen Propheten. 
 
 6. " The Prophet first describes what he him- 
 self experienced of the holy cross under the Old 
 Testament. It was necessary for him to be 
 typically a sacrifice for all people. He was 
 
CHAP. HI. 
 
 139 
 
 obliged to this according to the purpose of God. 
 God's object in all this was, to use him in His 
 kingdom to the end of time as one of the most 
 important of His instruments. In this respect 
 he is indeed a real type of Christ. Although the 
 light is not wanting in his dark sayings, yet it 
 shines not nearly so clearly as we experience it iu 
 the New Testament, by the testimony of the 
 Apostles, where they also testify of their cross. 
 For they already behold His glory with their 
 eyes. On tkis account Paul gloried most lovingly 
 in his cross and his weakness." Diedrich. 
 
 7. "In this third chapter such an earnest, in- 
 tense lamentation of the Prophet is written, that 
 many have regarded it as referring to nothing 
 else than to the sufferings and death of Christ. 
 For this reason, where Christ is painted with 
 His body lacerated with the thongs and the 
 crown of thorns on His head, the beginning of 
 this chapter is found recorded in Latin on the 
 picture." Eg. Hunnius. 
 
 8. The old expositors find here free scope for 
 their allegorical interpretations. Thus Pascha- 
 sitTs Raubertus, in his Preface to his third book 
 on Lamentations, says, "The more attentively I 
 examine this — as it were — funeral lamentation 
 over the whole body of the people, the more 
 profound are the mysteries which appear con- 
 cerning Christ and His body, so that tlie mourn- 
 ful discourse may be by turns interpreted, now 
 of the Synagogue, then especially of the Church, 
 and then again of the Passion of Christ." 
 Ghislerus, p. 120. And of Bonavbntura the 
 same author remarks, that he says, "This is so 
 evidently a lamentation for Christ and His mem- 
 bers, whose sufferings are here described, that 
 it is impossible to find in it a literal sense, with- 
 out distortion." 
 
 9. Ver. 2. "By light he represents prosperity, 
 hy darkness adversity. Is v. 30; xlv. 7; Iviii. 10; 
 Job xxii. 11, on which last passage the great 
 Luther, in a marginal gloss to the text of tlic 
 German version of the Bible, comments very 
 nervously, thus: Trouble and misfortune are 
 called darkness, happiness and prosperity light. 
 Here the verses of Camerarius, written on 2 
 Chr. XX. 12, may be quoted: 
 
 In tenebris vitfe densa et caligine mundi. 
 
 Cum nihil est toto pectore cousilii, 
 Turn nos eiigimus Deus ad te lumina cordis, 
 
 Nostra tuamque fides solius orat openi." — Forster. 
 
 10. Ver. 7. " To God nav anopov nopifiov, i. e. 
 To God every impassable road is passable. Of 
 the same purport are the following sayings, 
 which are worthy of being observed and re- 
 membered : Philo : deficiente ovini humano con- 
 cilia incipit divinum, where human expedients fail. 
 Divine begin; Taulerus: egrediente natura ingre- 
 dilur Deus, God enters when nature exits, Lu- 
 ther : te/npus desperationis tempus auxilii, the time 
 of despair is the time when help comes. The 
 greater the need, the nearer is God." Forster. 
 
 11. Ver. 8. Bonaventura refers the words to 
 the prayer of Christ on the Mount of Olives, — 
 If it be possible let this cup pass from Me (Matt. 
 xxvi. 39). Ghislbr., p. 129. — " The Omnipotent 
 God, knowing what is to our advantage, feigns 
 not to hear the cry of the suffering, that He may 
 increase their usefulness and that their lives may 
 be purified by discipline and they may seek 
 
 elsewhere that tranquil rest, which cannot be 
 found here." Rhabanus, in Ghisler., lb. — 
 " The most efficacious antidote (dXef(0dp/ia;;o)( 
 to this temptation is Hope (Heb. xii. 3-1 Ij, tu 
 which effect are the sayings of Augustine, Goil 
 does not give quickly, that thou mayest learn to 
 desire more ardently ; and. What God would 
 give. He withholds." Forster. 
 
 12. Ver. 8. [Prayer: '^ Grant, Almighty God. 
 that as Thou didst in former times so severely 
 chastise Thy people, we may in the present day 
 patiently submit to all Thy scourges, and in a 
 humble and meek spirit suffer ourselves to be 
 chastised as we deserve; and that wc may not, 
 in the meantime, cease to call on Thee, and that 
 however slowly Thou mayest seem to hear our 
 prayers, we may yet persevere continuously to 
 the end, until at length we shall really find that 
 salvation is not in vain promised to all those who 
 in sincerity of heart call on Thee, through Christ 
 our Lord. Amen." Calvin.] 
 
 13. Ver. 10. " The real appearance of the 
 Lord is not that of a lion or a bear (Is. xxxviii. 
 13 ; Job X. 16), but of a Shepherd taking the 
 most faithful care of His sheep. With respect 
 to this pastoral care, see Ps. xxiii.; Is. xl. 11 ; 
 Jer. xxiii. 3, 4; Ez. xxxiv. 16. And Bernard 
 beautifully says, Christ redeems His sheep at a 
 costly price, feeds them sumptuously, leads them 
 with solicitous carefulness, lodges them securely." 
 Forster. — [" Harsh is the complaint when .lere- 
 miah compares God to a bear and a lion. But 
 we have said that the apprehension of God's 
 wrath so terrified the faithful, that they could 
 not sufficiently express the atrocity of their 
 calamity ; and then borne in mind must also be 
 what we have stated, that they spoke according 
 to the judgment of the flesh; for they did not 
 always so moderate their feelings, but that 
 soaielhing fell from them worthy of blame. We 
 ought not, then, to make as a rule in religion all 
 the complaints of holy men, when they were 
 pressed down by the hand of God ; for when 
 their minds were in a state of confusion, they 
 uttered much that was intemperate. But we 
 ought, on the other hand, to acknowledge how 
 great must be our weakness, since we see that 
 the strongest have thus fallen, when God exer- 
 cised severity towards them." Calvin.] 
 
 14. Vers. 17, 18. "All other temptations are 
 as nothing, compared with those in which God 
 seems to set Himself in hostility to a man. 
 For as long as the pious taste the grace of God 
 and perceive His fatherly tenderness, every ad- 
 versity is so much the more easily endured by 
 them and they can t)e joyful and of good cheer 
 even amidst external causes for sorrow. See 
 Ps. Ivi., Ixii , Ixxiii. But, on the contrary, if 
 God disguises Himself in some severe aspect be- 
 fore them, and dissembles, and acts as if He 
 hears them not, is not favorably disposed to them, 
 but may be in the highest degree opposed to them 
 and against their interests, — then lamentations 
 commence, then begins that secret sorrow of the 
 soul, that excessive anguish, under which they 
 faint away and must sink to Hell, did not God 
 hold His hand over them and abridge their an- 
 guish. These are the buffetings of Satan, the 
 very dregs of hellish temptations, they are the 
 floods of Belial that will overwhelm human 
 
140 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 strength. Then they [the tempted] lose heart ; 
 for when, as it were, they lie in darkness, im- 
 mured in an eternal prison of every kind of 
 trouble, when the Lord closes His ears to their 
 pitiable cry, yes, when He has bent His bow 
 against them and set them up as a mark to shoot 
 against them all His darts and arrows, when He 
 has utterly ejected them from peace and all that 
 is good, in all respects which the Prophet here 
 relates in detail of himself, then at last they 
 come to think, as Jeremiah did, when he said. 
 Ml/ strength and hope is perished from the Lord, 
 until God again lets the gentle suu of His Divine 
 heavenly consolation and fatherly goodness shine 
 out from amidst the darkness of the temptations; 
 but in the meanwhile they must for a long time 
 have a taste of that future wrath, which the 
 damned must hereafter eternally suffer. Besides 
 Jeremiah's case here, the Scripture presents us 
 with a pitiable representation and sorrowful in- 
 stance of a man thus distressed, and a special 
 example for us, in the case of the patient Job. 
 . . . David also in Psalm xxxi., / said in my haste 
 I am cut off from before Thine eyes. Yes, even the 
 Son of God was compelled to feel in His holy 
 soul a similar spiritual temptation (yet without 
 any sin), when on the cross He said, My God, 
 My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me ?" Egiu. 
 HuNNius. — " What is here written by Jeremiah 
 is not new and unheard of; but very many ex- 
 amples occur in Scripture, of those who have 
 been harassed by this same temptation. The 
 following examples, however, are especially ap- 
 propriate here: Abraham, Gen. xvi. 1 (2); 
 David. Ps xxxi. 23 (22); Ixxvii. 8-10 (7-9); 
 Hezekiah, Is. xxxviii. 10, Job, vii. 15; xix. 6, 
 22; Jonah, ii. 5 (4); Paul, 2 Cor. xii. 9; to 
 whom 'nay be added, those most eminent Theo- 
 logians of our own age, Matthesius, Weller and 
 Hausmann, and especially Luther, who was 
 obliged to sit in that sieve of Satan, particularly 
 in the year of Christ 1527, about the time .of the 
 festival of the Visitation of Mary, concerning 
 which paroxysm of his, by far his most violent 
 one, D. JoH. Bugenhaguis has written a curi- 
 ous account, which is contained in Tom. iii. Jen. 
 Germ. Fol. 401." Foester. In the Leipzig 
 edition, this production is found in Vol. XXII., 
 pag. 498 ff., under the Title, " Z). Jo. Pomerani 
 und Justi Jx>nse Ilislorie von Lutheri geistUchen U7id 
 leiblichen Anfechtungen anno 1527." — ["Faith 
 sometimes is so stifled, that even the children of 
 God think that they are lost, and that it is all 
 over with their salvation. . . . There is no doubt 
 bill that the Prophet also expressly reminded the 
 faithful that they ought not to despair, . . . 
 though the devil tempted them to despair, 
 but that they ought then especially to struggle 
 against it. This is indeed, I allow, a hard and 
 perilous contest, but the faithful ought not to 
 faint, even when such a thing happens to them, 
 that is, when it seems to be all over with them 
 and no hope remains ; but, on the contrary, they 
 ought nevertheless to go on hoping, and that 
 indeed, as the Scripture says elsewhere, against 
 hope, or above hope (Horn. iv. 18). . . . Were any 
 one to ask, How can it be that hope and despair 
 should reside in the same man? the answer is, 
 that when faith is weak, that part of the soul is 
 empty, which admits despair. Now, faith is 
 
 sometimes not only enfeebled, but is also nearly 
 stifled. This, indeed, does not happen daily, but 
 there is no one whom God deeply exercises with 
 temptations, wlio does not feel that his faith is 
 nearly extiugtiished. It is then no wonder, that 
 despair then prevails ; but it is for a moment. 
 In the meantime, the remedy is, immediately to 
 flee to God and to complain of this misery, so 
 that He may succor and raise up those who are 
 thus fallen." Calvin.] 
 
 15. Ver. 19. "Just as wormwood tastes very bit- 
 ter, but serves many useful purposes, so the cross, 
 for the present, seemeth not to be joyous (Heb. 
 xii. 11). Nevertheless, it is a medicine for us. 
 Wormwood (Vermuth) has its name, thus (wehre 
 dem Muth), control the spirit [temper, or mettle 
 of the soul]. For wormwood restrains from 
 lewdness, disperses the bile, neutralizes poison, 
 and destroys all bad vermin and corruption, all 
 of which and much more, in a spiritual sense, 
 is done by the dear cross. Therefore, let us 
 esteem this our spiritual medicine." Cramer. 
 — " Was it necessary that Christ Himself should 
 be given gall to drink, why then should we be 
 able entirely to abstain from the like?" Cra- 
 mer. 
 
 16. Vers. 19-33. " We see here that there are 
 two sources of consolation, internal and exter- 
 nal. The internal is, when one is sure in his 
 heart that he has a gracious God, of whom he 
 may expect every good thing in all difficulties 
 and distresses. But this consolation sometimes 
 expires, as we see here in the case of Jeremiah, 
 and from the words and sayings of David, as we 
 have shown above from his Psalms. It often 
 seems as though God Himself, together with 
 Heaven and Earth, is against one. How now 
 should it be with one placed in such temptation? 
 Answer: He should lay hold of the external 
 consolation, which be finds, not in his heart, but 
 in the Holy Scripture, in so many and divine 
 consolatory declarations, which God therein pre- 
 sents to us, together with many examples in the 
 cases of those to whom God has fulfilled and 
 verified such promises. And then also he should 
 carefully consider these heart-moving words, 
 which Jeremiah here uses, which he did not get 
 from his heart, for that spoke to him in a very 
 different fashion, but he received them from the 
 Holy Ghost ; thus. It is of the Lord's goodness, 
 that we are not consumed. His mercy fails not. 
 but it is new every morning; The Lord is gra- 
 cious unto him who waiteth for Him, and to the 
 soul that inquires after Him ; It is an excellent 
 thing to be patient and to hope for the help of 
 the Lord ; He does not cast off for ever, but He 
 is indeed sorry and moved by compassion accord- 
 ing to His great mercies, etc. These and similar 
 sayings we should, in great temptations, take 
 hold of and hold them fast in faith, in spite even 
 of the thoughts and objections of our own hearts. 
 Tliereby will God revive in a troubled heart the 
 internal consolation, so that one can say with 
 .Jeremiah, Thou wilt be again graciously mind- 
 ful of me, for so my soul assures me. This I 
 t.ake to heart, therefore I still hope." Wiiriemb. 
 Summarien. — " It is the habit and custom of God, 
 first thoroughly to prove men by affliction, and 
 after that to hear His chihlren, if thoy, as tine 
 gold and silver tried in tlio dvii. arc found to be 
 
CHAP. ill. 
 
 141 
 
 clean and pure. Aa it is again written, Whoso 
 adheres to wisdom shall dwell securely, and 
 although at first she sets herself in opposition to 
 him, and brings fear and dread upon him, and 
 proves him with her rod and tries him with her 
 chastisements, until she finds that he is without 
 guile, she will then return to him in the right 
 way, and comfort him and show him her secrets. 
 Sirach. iv. 18-21 (1.5-18)." Egid. Hun-nius. 
 
 17. (Ver. 21. Pr:iyer. "Grant, Almighty God, 
 that as there are none of us who have not con- 
 tinually to contend with many temptations, and 
 as such is our intirmity, that we are ready to 
 succumb under them, except Thou helpest us, — 
 O grant, that we may be sustained by Thine in- 
 vincible power, and that also, when Thou wouldst 
 humble us, we may loathe ourselves on account 
 of our sins, and thus perseveringly contend, 
 until, having gained the victory, we shall give 
 Thee the glory for Thy perpetual aid in Christ 
 Jesus our Lord. Amen." Calvin.] 
 
 18. Vers. 22-24. "These are approved texts 
 and cordials for all stricken hearts. 1. God's 
 mercies and compassions, which we may set over 
 against God regarded as a consuming fire, Deut. 
 iv. 24. 2. That His compassions fail 7iot, with 
 which we may resist the temptation, that God 
 will no more be gracious and has forgotten our 
 affliction and oppression, Ps. xliv. 25 (24). 
 3. That His mercies are new evert/ morning, which 
 we oppose to our temptation when we are com- 
 pelled to say with David, I am chastened every 
 moi-ning, Ps. Ixxiii. 14. 4. That God is faithful, 
 to meet the temptation, that God will make it 
 too hard for us to bear, 1 Cor. x. 13. 5. That 
 God will be our portion and reward, that we will 
 be richly recompensed in Heaven." Cramer. 
 
 19. Vers. 22, 23. "The whole purport of this 
 truly golden maxim is consolatory, and to this 
 end it is to be pleaded in view of the magnitude 
 of the evil both of our guilt and of our punish- 
 ment. With this accord Rom. v. 21, and Ps. 
 cxxx. 7, as well as the following from Augustine, 
 God's compassion exceeds the misery of all man- 
 kind. The abuse of this maxim is fourfold. 
 The first is that of the Epicureans, who, from 
 like passages of Scripture, in which the im- 
 mensity of the Divine pity is treated of, deduce 
 that, ancient piece of jargon (noKKvafibv), Let us 
 continue in sin that grace may the more abound, 
 Rom. vi. 1. The second abuse is that of Origen, 
 who concluded that, because of the infinite com- 
 passion of God, the damned would at length some 
 time or other, be liberated from the torment of 
 Hell and be saved (Horn. ix. in Jerem.). The 
 third abuse is that of Huber {Samuelis mort., 
 1624), who, from the amplitude and universality 
 of God's compassion, presumed to fabricate the 
 doctrine of universal and unlimited election. 
 The fourth abuse is that of the Photinians, who 
 80 far expand the words of Scripture concerning 
 the compassion of God, as blasphemously to 
 assert, that God, out of His mere compassion 
 alone, forgives our sins, without any compen- 
 sation and satisfaction rendered by Christ." 
 
 FoRSTER. 
 
 20 Ver. 24. "Luther has finely comprised 
 the distinction between hope and faith, in the fol- 
 lowing well-rounded perind: Faith looks at the 
 word which promises, Hope at the thingpromised, 
 
 (^Fides intuetur verbum rei, spes vero rem verhi)." 
 FoRSTER. — ["Were God to take away the promise, 
 all the miserable would inevitably perish ; for 
 they can never lay hold on His mercy except 
 through His word. This, then, is the reason why 
 Scripture so often connects these two things to- 
 gether, even God's mercy and His faithfulness 
 in fulfilling His promises." Calvin.] 
 
 21. [Vers. 24, 25. " It next occurred to the 
 Prophet, that whatever he lost or suffered, or 
 witnessed of the sufferings of his people, his 
 grand interest was secure. He was satisfied that 
 the Lord was his all-sufficient Portion. He was 
 conscious that he had chosen Him as his portion, 
 and expected his happiness from Him, and not 
 from the world ; and therefore he determined 
 still to hope in Him, and refer all his concerns 
 to His wisdom, truth, and love. In this he evi- 
 dently proposed himself as an example to his 
 people, that they might seek comfort from God 
 when all other comfort failed. And though they 
 might not be able confidently to aver tliat the 
 Lord was their Portion, yet they might remem- 
 ber that He was kind and merciful to those who 
 wait for Him and seek Him." Scott.] 
 
 22. Ver. 25. " When we men are in trouble or 
 temptation, the Devil is accustomed to portray 
 and represent God to us as very different from 
 what He really is. For he depicts him as an un- 
 gracious, pitiless, wrathful Judge, not to be 
 treated with, who would only kill us and damn 
 us and not wish us to be happy, and thus the 
 Devil would frighten us and drive us to despair. 
 We should remove our eyes from this frightful 
 image of Satan's conjuring, and look upon the 
 Lord as the Prophet Jeremiah here depicts for 
 us His countenance, as it were ; yea, as God por- 
 trays Himself in His holy word, namely thus, 
 The Lord is friendly to the soul that seeks after 
 Him." Egid. Hunnius. 
 
 23. Ver. 25. "God's love both prepares the 
 way for and rewards ours. Being more benig- 
 nant it precedes ours ; being more faithful it is 
 returned [by ours] ; being more attractive it is 
 sought after. It is rich to all who invoke its 
 aid, yet has nothing better than its own self. It 
 devotes itself to the deserving, reserves itself for 
 a reward, applies itself to the souls of the saints 
 for their refreshment, gives itself in payment for 
 the redemption of the captive. Thou art good, 
 O Lord, to the soul of him who seeks Thee. How 
 gracious, then, to him who finds Thee ! But 
 here indeed is something wonderful, that no one 
 can successfully seek Thee unless he have first 
 found Thee. Dost Thou, therefore, wish to be 
 found that Thou mayest be sougLit ; to be sought, 
 that Thou mayest be found? Thou art one who 
 can be sought and found, yet not prevented [prse- 
 veniri). For although we say, 'In the morning 
 shall my prayer prevent Thee,' Ps. Ixxxviii. 
 14 (13), yet there is no doubt that all prayer is 
 lifeless that inspiration has not prevented {non 
 prsevenerit)." Bernardus in libro de diligendo Deo, 
 quoted by Ghisler. p. 144. 
 
 24. [Vers. 25, 26. "God is good to all His crea- 
 tures; but in particular to them that wait for Him, 
 to the soul that seeks Him. While trouble is pro- 
 longed and deliverance deferred, we must pa- 
 tiently wait for God's gracious returns to us : nnd 
 while we wait for Him by faith, we must seek linn 
 
142 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 by prayer ; they that do so will find it good, ver. 
 26, and to hope that the Salvation of the Lord will 
 come, though difficulties lie in the way, to wait till 
 it does come, though it be long delayed; and while 
 we wait to be quiet and silent, not quarrelling 
 with God, or making ourselves uneasy, but acqui- 
 escing in the Divine disposals ; Father, Thy loill he 
 done! If we call this to mind, we may have hope 
 that all will end well at last." Matt. Henry.] 
 
 25. Ver. 26. " In the practice of Christianity, 
 hope and patience, the most ethcient of virtues, 
 engage mutually in common labors, and neither 
 without the other can discharge its duty."' FiJR- 
 STER. — " The little herb. Patience, does not grow 
 in every body's garden But we are admonished 
 to seek it, because, 1. It is a very precious vir- 
 tue, and a part of the service we owe to God, 
 according to the first table. 2. It contains in 
 itself another virtue, namely, hope in God. 3. It 
 is easier for us to practice it, if we accustom 
 ourselves to it from our youth. 4. It can over- 
 come many wrongs, abuses and outrages. 5. Mis- 
 fortune will not continue for ever. Is. liv. 7. 
 6. At all events the end will be favorable. 7. God 
 does not willingly afflict us [from His heart), but 
 always designs something different and better for 
 us, and dearly wishes that He might not punish 
 us at all (Hos. xi. 9)." Cramer. 
 
 [" God, when He takes ray goods and chattels hence, 
 Gives me a jiortion, priving patience. 
 What is in God is God ; if so it be 
 He patience gives, He gives Himself to me." 
 
 Robert Herrick.] 
 
 26. Vers. 26-36. " These are admirable and, 
 beyond measure, comforting words, with which 
 the holy Prophet opens the abyss of God's mercy 
 and comforts therewith himself and the people. 
 As if he would say. It is against God's nature 
 to subject us to such hard dif^cipline, and to 
 let us be driven and injured by the world. But 
 He does it for the very best reason, not to ruin, 
 but rather to edify, not to grieve but to fill with 
 joy forever. For He is not of the disposition of 
 the children of men, who, if their anger is once 
 excited, there is no end to it. ButGod, although 
 He causes grief, and lets His wrath, sternness, 
 and justice be seen, yet He is again moved to 
 pity as soon as men cordially repent of their sin 
 and transgression. Therefore, this present cap- 
 tivity should not be regarded as if He had eter- 
 nally rejected His poor people, and would never 
 turn their captivity, or as if He would indeed al- 
 low His captives to be trodden under foot, or, 
 much less, as if he would subvert the right of a 
 man, or allow his cause to be turned aside before 
 the Most High, as if the Lord saw it not, or knew 
 nothing of it. Far be it from this! He knows 
 and sees how cruelly the tyrants oppress their 
 captives; He, moreover, graciously regards the 
 patience of the oppressed, and will help them 
 again according to His mercies." Eqiu. Hunnius. 
 
 27. Ver. 27. " It is added here that a man 
 should be accustomed to cross-bearing {tj) arav- 
 iyxttnpiq) from his youth. And we may also with 
 propriety apply here that saying of the Poet, 
 A teneris axsuesce.re multum est, There is great ad- 
 v;intage in being accustomed to a thing from a 
 tiiider age. For patience begets experience 
 (Horn. V. 4), — experience, I mean, in matters of 
 cross-bearing. Vexation gives understanding 
 
 (Is. xxviii. 19, [Vulg. and Douay]). But what 
 doth he know that hath not been tried? (Sir. 
 xxxiv. 9). For, ;is Nazianzen puts it, ov npoauna 
 XpiaTiaviauof;, a/.Mx -rrlang, Christianity is faith, 
 not outward appearances. And Luther says, 
 Unexperienced persons are merely unprofitable 
 theorizers. But since it is of advantage, in order 
 to become more fully acquainted with any course 
 of discipline, that one should be subjected to it 
 from a tender age, so does it especially conduce to 
 the acquisition of experience in matters of cross- 
 bearing, if one is trained in them from hisyouth." 
 FoRSTER. — "Jeremiah himself bore the yoke in 
 his youth. He was very young, according to 
 Jer. i. 6, when he was called to the prophetical 
 office (in the 13th year of Josiab), and from the 
 beginning he experienced much opposition and 
 many trials, hence after eighteen years under 
 Joakim and eleven years under Zedekiah, he was 
 able to endure yet severer persecution. The 
 earlier he had learned to bear the yoke, the better 
 was he able to bear it later in life. It is a gold- 
 en truth that is here expressed. The cases of 
 Joseph and David also confirm it. A youth of 
 hardships has already brought forth much fruit 
 of godliness, and educated many staunch men for 
 the kingdom of God. Therefore be thou also 
 reconciled to a youth of hardship." Calwer, 
 Handbuch der Bibelerkldrung. — "We ought not 
 only to bear the yoke, but to bear it in ouryouth. 
 For if we bear it late in life, we begin by exer- 
 cising penitence for the past, rather than by ac- 
 quiring strength. Let us then anticipate the 
 flight of the years of our youth by suitable dis- 
 cipline, that we may each of us say, God, who 
 feedest [E. V., Thou hast taught'\ me from my 
 youth (Ps. Ixxi. 17) ; rather than be obliged to 
 lament at the remembrance of our faults, saying, 
 Remember not the sins of my youth and of my 
 ignorance (Ps. xxv. 7 [See Vulg.])." Ambrose, 
 Serm. 2, on Ps. cxix. 9. — Deus vult longi prsdii 
 militem, God<;boo<es the soldier who has passed 
 through a long fight. Hillary's Exposition of 
 Ps. cxix. 9, quoted by Ghisler., p. 146. — "What 
 praise is due to old men, if failing in strength and 
 having been released from long continued labor, 
 they prefer to take their rest? On the other 
 hand, what glory is due to young men, when in 
 the very fervor of youth itself, they moderate 
 their lives by a regimen of strict morality ?" 
 Cassiodokus, in Ps. cxix. 88, quoted by Ghisler., 
 p. 147. 
 
 28. [Ver. 28. "He has learnt that necessary 
 lesson of independence, that shows him how he is 
 to serve himself; to give no trouble to others; and 
 keep his troubles, as far as possible, in his own 
 bosom." Adam Clarke.] 
 
 29. Ver 29. '''71X, if so be, peradventure. 
 "This particle affords to the Romanists no sup- 
 port for their fiction of doubt.* Luther's inter- 
 pretation may be seen in his marginal note on 
 Joel ii. 14." FoRSTER. 
 
 80. Ver. 30. "It may be asked here, whether 
 this sentence refers to toleration [the passive, 
 non-resistant endurance of evil] ; whether the 
 words, if any one is strvrk nn the cheek, etc., 
 
 * rj. e., in regard to God's willingness to pardon, on which 
 they rest the necessity of propitiating Him by penance.-- 
 W. H.H.I 
 
CHAP. III. 
 
 142 
 
 may not seem to support the Anabaptists, who 
 endeavor to prove, from this and similar passages 
 of Scripture, especially from Matt. v. 39, 40, that 
 all species of revenge is forbidden to Christians? 
 But a distinction must be made between public 
 and private, and lawful and unlawful revenge." 
 
 FORSTER. 
 
 31. [Vers. 31-33. Prayer. '• Grant, Almighty 
 God, that as it is expedient for us to be daily 
 chastised by Thy hand, we may willingly submit 
 to Thee, aud not doubt, but that Thou wilt be 
 faithful, and not prove us with too much rigor, 
 but that Thou wilt consider our weakness, so that 
 we may thus calmly bear all Thy chastisements, 
 until we shall at length enjoy that perfect blessed- 
 ness, which is now hid to us under hope, and as 
 it were sealed, until Christ Thy Son shall reveal 
 it at His coming. Amen." Calvin] 
 
 32. Ver. 33. '■'■He does not afflict men from His 
 heart. This is not to be understood absolutely/ 
 {^d-^zXcJr), but comparatively, namely, with respect 
 to [what may be called] God's own special work, 
 which consists not in afflicting, but in doing good. 
 Briefly, His disposition towards us is like that 
 of a father towards his son, in reference to which 
 Augustine very beautifully says. He is both a 
 father and a God when He caresses; and when 
 He smites, still is He a father. . . . With which 
 agrees this saying of Nazianzen: Meli^ov to 
 fiirpov T^g ^iXav&puniaq vnep to /li-pov -yq 
 TTaidayuyiag. The measure of His philanthropy 
 exceeds the measure of His severity as a dis- 
 ciplinarian." FoRSTER. — "The very essence of 
 His being inclines Him to bless, therefore it is 
 written. He does not afflict from His heart His chil- 
 dren of the human race; but if they despise His 
 blessing, it is His to smite and requite them with 
 the greater severity." Tholuok, Stunden Christ!.. 
 Andacht, XXII., 5'. 120. 
 
 " Deines Wesens Weaen nur die Liebe ist, 
 Streage nur bei Dir aus lauter Lii'lie fliesst." — 
 lb., Andacht, A'SA'., S. 171. 
 
 32. [Vers. 34-39. Prayer. "Grant, Almighty 
 God, that as we are at this day tossed here and 
 there by so many troubles, and almost all things 
 in the world are in confusion, so that wherever 
 we turn our eyes, nothing but thick darkness 
 meets us, — grant that we may learn to sur- 
 mount all obstacles, and to raise our eyes by 
 faith above the world, so that we may acknow- 
 ledge that governed by '^^ .ly wonderful counsel 
 is everything that seems to us to happen by 
 chance, in order that we may seek Thee, and 
 know that help will be ready for us through Thy 
 mercy whenever we humbly seek the pardon of 
 our sins, through Christ Jesus our Lord. Amen." 
 Calvin.] 
 
 33. Vers. 37, 38. "In respect to the sins of 
 men, He is not entirely inactive. Not, indeed, 
 as if He took pleasure in their sins, or moved 
 men to commit them, or had ordained men to 
 their sins. That be far from Him ! But because 
 from the very first He had entire knowledge of 
 them (Jer. xxiii. 24; Ps. cxxxix. 7-12 ; Job xxiv. 
 23; Sir. xxiii. 27, 28; Wis. i. 6-10). . . . There- 
 fore it follows, that all the punishments of sin 
 are sent and controlled by God, to His own peo- 
 ple, indeed, for the purpose of discipline, but to 
 the ungodly, for their punishment (Is. xlv. 7; 
 Am. iii. 6). . . . Therefore that is an execrable 
 
 error of some of the heathen philosophers, who 
 taught that what happened to a man, whether 
 good or evil, came by chance, even as his luck 
 befell him: but that God troubled Himself with 
 the afi"airs of men, was not to be thought of: but 
 that He sits in Heaven, in undisturbed repose, and 
 lets men here, between themselves, plunge, wade 
 or swim as they can, since He takes no concern 
 in their affairs." Egid. Hunnius. — " Who then 
 can say that anything is done without the Lord's 
 command? This is a precious word. For first, 
 all adversaries, however lively their devices may 
 be, are only messengers and servants of my Lord, 
 and must obey Him, when He has purposes of 
 love in my behalf for them to accomplish. And, 
 as Luther says, Our God is entire Master of the 
 art of whipping a rogue by the hands of others. 
 . . . For the rest, I should not regard the 
 thoughts and devices of all my adversaries, but 
 the loving purposes which my Lord intends to 
 accomplish by them, as David sings, He has 
 spread a table for me in the presence of mine 
 enemies, and filled my cup to overflowing. Whilst 
 they rage and roar, be of good cheer and say, St. 
 Peter cannot prevent God from giving what He 
 will. . . . 
 
 Ibr lieben Feinde sorgt so viel, mir Noth iind Gram zu 
 
 machen, 
 Seht doch, ihr seid Handlanger bios in meines Herren Sacbenl 
 Wohl gtamte icb inicli bitterlich, wenn icb es nicht erkennte, 
 Dass doch mein Herr der Wundarzt ist und ihr nur Instru- 
 
 mente. 
 Wie selig, wer er hat erkaunt, dass aller Faden Enden 
 Von aller Menschen Werk und Wort ruhn doch in Gottea 
 
 Hinden. 
 
 There is then only one real misfortune for men 
 on earth, and that is Sin!'^ Tholuck, St. Christl. 
 Andacht, XXVIII , S. 162. 
 
 34. Ver. 38. " Two words occur here which 
 need to be more accurately defined. The first 
 question is, what is the exact idea of evil in this 
 passage? Calvin, too, broadly extends its mean- 
 ing 80 as to cover all the evils that are done, and 
 that happen in the world, thus not obscurely em- 
 bracing all sins. But from the context even a 
 blind man may perceive, that the Prophet is not 
 speaking of evil in general, . . . but in fact of 
 that particular species of evil, which is usually 
 called the evil of punishment. For the evil of 
 crime, as such, evidently cannot and ought not 
 to be in any manner attributed to God as its au- 
 thor or producing cause (Dent, xxxii. 4; Ps. v. 
 5 (4) ; Rom. ix. 14 ; 1 John i. 5 ; James i. 13) ; 
 but the evil of punishment is, here and in various 
 other places in the Sacred Scriptures, imputed 
 to God as a just Judge (Is. xlv. 7; Am. iii. 6; 
 Sir. xl. 32). The other word referred to, is that 
 translated commandeth (to, jubere). In the He- 
 brew it is HIX. . . . Calvin twists this word to 
 
 T • 
 
 mean the secret decrees of God, by which He 
 bends the purposes of men hither and thither, 
 according to His own arbitrary will. Whence 
 he infers, that nothing is done without the com- 
 mand and foreordination of God. He adduce.s 
 the example of Shimei [2 Sam. xvi. 5, 10], who 
 had command to curse. If he had understood 
 this with reference to the evil of punishment, his 
 words would have borne the appearance at least 
 of truth. But what Calvin in this passage makes 
 so broad, that he writes. Nothing can be done 
 without the Divine mandate, including sins like- 
 
144 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 wise, cannot and ought by no means to be al- 
 lowed ; for the contrary is most clearly attested 
 by what is written in Jer. xix. 5; xxiii. 32; 
 xxix. 23; Sir. xv. 10-22." Forster. — ["Let us 
 now see how God commands what is wrongly and 
 foolishly done by men. Surely He does not com- 
 mand the ungodly to do what is wicked, for He 
 would thus render them excusable ; for where 
 God's authority interposes, there no blame can 
 be. But God is said to command whatever He 
 has decreed, according to His hidden counsel. 
 There are, then, two kinds of commands; one 
 belongs to doctrine, and the other to the hidden 
 judgments of God. The command of doctrine, 
 so to speak, is an evident approbation which ac- 
 quits men ; for when one obeys God, it is enough 
 that he has God as his authority, though he were 
 condemned by a hundred worlds. . . . But God 
 is said to command according to His secret de- 
 crees what He does not approve, as far as men 
 are concerned. So Shimei had a command to 
 curse, and yet he was not exempt from blame ; 
 for it was not his purpose to obey God ; nay, he 
 thought that he had offended God no less than 
 David [2 Sam. xix. 19, 20]. Thus this distinction 
 ought to be understood, that some things are 
 commanded by God, not that men may have it as 
 a rule of action, but when God executes His 
 secret judgments by ways unknown to us. Thus, 
 then, ought this passage to be understood, even 
 that nothing is carried on without God's com- 
 inind, that is, without His decree, and, as they 
 say, without His ordination. It hence appears, 
 that those things which seem contingent, are yet 
 ruled by the certain providence of God, so that 
 nothing is done at random. And what philoso- 
 phers call accident, or contingent (ki'(hxduemi'), 
 is necessary as to God ; for God decreed before 
 the worl 1 was made whatever He was to do ; so 
 that there is nothing now done in the world which 
 is not directed by His counsel. * * * Now they 
 who object and say that God is thus made the 
 author of evils, may be easily refuted ; for nothing 
 is more preposterous than to measure the incom- 
 prehensible judgment of God by our contracted 
 minds. . . . This, then, is our wisdom, to em- 
 brace only what the Scripture teaches. Now, 
 when it teaches us that nothing is done except 
 through the will of God, it does not speak indis- 
 criminately, as though God approved of murders, 
 and thefts, and sorceries, and adulteries; what 
 then ? even that God by His just and righteous 
 counsel so orders all things, that He still wills 
 not iniquihj and abhors all injustice. . . . How 
 much soever the most wicked may indulge them- 
 selves in their vices. He still rules them, .... 
 that He mny punish sins with sins, as Paul teaches 
 us, for he says that God gives up to a reprobate 
 mind those who deserve such a punishment, that 
 He gives them up to disgraceful lusts, that He 
 blinds more and more the despisers of His word 
 (Rom. i. 28; 2 Thess. ii. 10). And then God 
 has various ways, and those innumerable and 
 unknown to us. . . . Thus we see that God is 
 not the author of evils, though nothing happens 
 but by His nod and through His will, — for far 
 different is His design from that of wicked men. 
 ... In a word, as fir as the Heavens are from 
 the earth, so great is the difference between the 
 works of God and the deeds of men, for the ends, 
 
 as I have said, are altogether different." Cal- 
 vin.] 
 
 35. Ver. 39. " The danger here is, that very 
 few sufficiently examine themselves. Whoever 
 does this will discover, how God punishes our 
 sins, and we suffer no undeserved distress." 
 Heim u. Hoffmann, die grossen Propheten. — It ig 
 usual with unrenewed men commonly, to become 
 enraged at him who puuishes them, even when 
 their punishment is entirely just. Thus we read 
 in the Revelation of John (xvi. 9, 11, 21), that 
 men will blaspheme the name of God, who pours 
 out the vials of His wrath upon them, and that 
 they will not repent of their sins. This per- 
 versity of the heart, which mistakes right for 
 wrong, and wrong for right, will reach its ut- 
 most height in the last days, but its roots reach 
 back to the beginning of the world, where they 
 started with the lies of the Serpent (Gen. iii. 4, 
 •5). — "The evils of punishment are only the ef- 
 fects, or fruits, of the evils of sin (Rom. vi. 23 ; 
 Jas. i. 15). Hence Augustine says, with great 
 propriety, ' Punishment daily increases, because 
 sin increases daily ; the chastisements of God 
 continue without cessation, because crimes among 
 the people are equally persistent.' But, on the 
 other hand, Ambrosius says, with truth ; ' God 
 had been ready to change His sentence, if thou 
 hadst been willing to amend thy wickedness by 
 penitence.' " Forster. 
 
 36. Vers. 40-42. [" How are we to get the par- 
 don of our sins ? The Prophet tells us: — 1. Let 
 us examine ourselves. 2. Let us turn again to the 
 Lord. 3. Let us lift up our heart ; let us make 
 fervent prayer and supplication for mercy. 4. 
 Ld us lift up oar hand ; let us solemnly promise 
 to be His, and bind ourselves in a covenant to be 
 the Lord's only: so much lifting up the hand to 
 God implies. Or, let us put our heart on our 
 liand and offer it to God : so some have translated 
 this clause. 5. We have transgressed ; let our con- 
 fession of sin be fervent and sincere. 6. And to 
 us who profess Christianity it may be added, Be- 
 lieve on the Lord Jesus Christ as having died for 
 thee; and thou shalt not perish, but have ever- 
 lasting life." Adam Clarke]. 
 
 37. Vers. 40, 41. "When Jeremiah says, Let us 
 search and try our ways, and turn again to the 
 Lord ; let us lift up our hearts with our hands unto 
 Oodin the heavens; he reminds us of tlie proper 
 method to be observed in prayer, namely, sin- 
 cere confession of sin and repentance must pre- 
 cede our petitions. For we know that God does 
 not hear impenitent sinners (John ix. 31). This 
 method God Himself also has taught us to ob- 
 serve, since He says in Is. i. 15, If ye make many 
 prayers, I ivill not hear you. Why? For your 
 hands are full of blood. But He immediately adds 
 good counsel: Wash and make yourselves clean, 
 put away your evil doings from before Mine eyes, 
 then come and let us reasoii together.''' WUrtemb. 
 Summarien. 
 
 38. Vers. 39 42. " Here two very different kinds 
 of murmuring are indicated. One that of the 
 ungodly which Lsaiah has described, viii. 21, If 
 they suffer hunger, they will fret themselves and 
 curse their king and their God. But besides 
 this, a very salutary kind of murmuring is sug- 
 gested, which is not directed against God or 
 men, but consists in a man's being discontented 
 
CilAi'. iii. 
 
 145 
 
 with himself and fretting over his sins and for- 
 saking them, and in examining his life that 
 he may know how wicked he has been, since 
 he has not been afraid to sin before the 
 face of God, most holy (Is. Ixiv. 6 ; Dan. ix. 
 6-14). . . . But that prayer and confession of 
 sins may be acceptable to God, it is required, 
 that not only the mouth may pray, but, as Jere- 
 miah says, the heart and the hands must be 
 lifted up to heaven. For where the mouth only 
 prays, and the heart is not in it, God esteems 
 such spiritless prayer as little as the prayer of 
 those Pharisees and heathen, who, when they 
 wished to pray, babbled much with their mouths, 
 without spirit or sincerity (Matt. vi. 5-8 ; Is. 
 xxix. 13). . . . Yet we learn from these few brief 
 words of the Prophet Jeremiah, that prayer is 
 not to be deferred too long, nor delayed by im- 
 penitence. Otherwise it will be too late to call 
 on God and come to Him with prayer, as hap- 
 pened to the Jews, who delayed their repentance 
 and prayer till God's wrath was already kindled. 
 And when they afterwards called on God, it 
 availed nothing (with regard to averting spiri- 
 tual punishment), therefore they uttered this 
 lamentation. Thou hast covered Thyself with a 
 cloud, that no prayer could pass through (Is. 
 i. 15; lix. 1-3; Mic. iii. 4; Prov. i. 28.)" Egib. 
 
 HUNNIUS. 
 
 89. Ver. 41. "In such prayer we must perse- 
 vere, and not as it were desist if help does not 
 come immediately, but must always continue to 
 pray, till the Lord look down from Heaven and 
 behold us, as Jeremiah here says. For God has 
 not such tender ears that He would soon grow 
 weary of hearing, as those men of whom it is 
 said, a beggar may be neither poor nor worthy, 
 — but they will treat him graciously, if he per- 
 sist tenaciously in his entreaties (Luke xi. 9 ; 
 Col. iv. 2 ; 1 Thess. v. 17)." Wurtemb. Summa- 
 rien. 
 
 Ut tua pertingat penetretque in oratio ecelum, 
 
 Corde sit ex puro, sit brevis atque frequens. — Forster. 
 
 ['*ie<MS lift up our heart with our hands, — the 
 antidote to hypocrisy. Ps. Ixxxvi. 4 ; 1 Tim. 
 ii. 8." Fausset]. 
 
 40. Vers. 42, 43. ["The Prophet proceeded 
 to direct the confessions of his people and to put 
 words into their mouths. He humbly acknow- 
 ledges that they had transgressed and rebelled 
 against God ; and as He had not pardoned, it was 
 plain they had not repented ; this was the cause 
 of all their miseries, of which he led them hum- 
 bly and submissively to complain to the Lord. 
 He had covered them with His anger, pursued 
 them by His judgments, and destroyed them 
 without pity : and He had so covered Himself 
 with a thick cloud, that their prayers could find 
 no admission. The hypocritical prayers of the 
 people for deliverance were rejected; and even 
 the fervent prayers of the Prophet in that be- 
 half were discouraged." Scott. — " If the Lord 
 has not pardoned our sins, we may be sure, that 
 it is because we have not repented and believed 
 His Gospel : yet we may be forgiven, even though 
 we have not the comfort of i". ' Scott.] 
 
 41. Ver. 44. " This cloud its not physical but 
 mystical, a cloud, namely, condensed from the 
 mists and vapors of our sins, the Holy Spirit 
 thus interpreting it in Is. lix. 1, 2 ; Ps. Ixvi. 18 ; 
 
 10 
 
 John ix. 31. With which agrees that saying of 
 Augustine, Prxfacti peccatores sunt Dei illusores 
 nan oratores, Hardened sinners mock God, they 
 do not pray to Him. If therefore we wish our 
 prayers to be heard, this cloud must be dispersed 
 by true and sincere repentance, as Isaiah ex- 
 horts, i. 15-18." Forster. — "However it may 
 have an angry and threatening appearance, that 
 God should draw a dark cloud-covering over His 
 face, yet after all it is no iron wall, but only a 
 cloud that may be easily dissipated, and when 
 God removes our sins as a veil (Is. xliv. 22), 
 then He drives this cloud away." Cbamer. 
 
 42. Vers. 44-49. ["The prolonging of troubles 
 is sometimes a temptation, even to praying 
 people, to question whether God be what they 
 have always believed Him to be, a prayer-hear- 
 ing God; and the distresses of God's people 
 sometimes prevail to that degree, that they can- 
 not find any footing for their faith, nor keep 
 their head above water, with any comfortable 
 expectation." Henry.] 
 
 43. Ver. 50. " Till the Lord behold from Heaven. 
 This phrase is found also in Ps. cii. 20 (19); 
 xiv. 2 ; xxxiii. 13 ; Gen. xviii. 21. Zanchius 
 (f 1590) endeavors to prove from this expression 
 that Heaven in which God is said to dwell, is 
 a place in the created universe {ens creatum) 
 above the visible heavens. But this is absurd. 
 For it would fallow, 1. That God is not every- 
 where, but is contained in Heaven, which is con- 
 trary to the doctrine taught in 1 Kings viii. 27. 
 2. That the birds in the air are nearer God, than 
 are the pious and faithful on earth ; thus Au- 
 gustine argues (Book 2, the Sermon on the 
 Mount, ch. ix.). If the habitation of God is be- 
 lieved to be in the Heavens, regarded as the 
 higher parts of the world, then the birds are ia 
 reality better oflF than we, for their life is nearer 
 to God." Forster. 
 
 44. Ver. 51. "His grief is so great, that it ia 
 not diminished by tears (as it ought to be, accord- 
 ing to the ordinary course of nature), as the 
 Poet says, 
 
 ExpUtur lacrymis, tgeriturqm. dolor, 
 
 \^Ovid, Tristia, 4, 3, 38], (appeased by tears and 
 spent is grief), but rather is so intensified that 
 it consumes his soul, i. e. his life, the heart, the 
 seat of life, being consumed." Forster. 
 
 45. Ver. 53. " We are aroused to fervent 
 prayer, by our own special calamity, as by an 
 alarm-bell. Thus the people of God here ac- 
 knowledge, that in the deepest anguish, when 
 almost sunk into the ground in the graves of the 
 lost, they had called on the name of the Lord 
 and had been heard. As often then as God now 
 casts a man into the grave, that is to say, lets 
 him sink into some temporal misfortune or men- 
 tal despair, he should remember that he is thereby 
 summoned to prayer, that he should lift his heart 
 to God and call upon Him with sighing and 
 weeping." Eg. Hunnius. 
 
 46. Ver. 55. " Tiie prayer of the righteous, 
 says Augustine, is the key of Heaven; as prayer 
 ascends, the compassion of God descends." For- 
 ster. 
 
 47. Vers. 48-66. "Jeremiah thought that in- 
 justice was done him, although he did not regard 
 himself as innocent before God, but ascribed 
 
14G 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 everything that befell him and his people, to his 
 own sins and to the sins of the people ; yet he held 
 that injustice was done him by his enemies, who 
 persecuted him on account of the word of God. 
 And in the same way may one, when he suffers 
 wrong from his enemies, appeal to his innocence 
 before God and men, as David says. Lord do me 
 justice, for I am innocent (Ps. xxvi. 1). But 
 before God no one siiould esteem himself guilt- 
 less, but we should remember that the evil which 
 befalls us undeservedly at the hands of our 
 enemies, is deservedly sent upon us by God, on 
 account of other sins, that we should repent of. 
 In repentance, moreover, no one should look 
 and wait for others, before he himself makes a 
 beginning, but as Jeremiah here sets an example 
 of repentance before others, so should every one 
 else do. Then, at least, there will be a general 
 repentance, and God will regard our repentance 
 and will hear us according to His promise, for 
 which we shall praise Him for ever and ever. 
 Amen." W'drtemb. Summarien. 
 
 48. Ver. 57. ["Fear not. How powerful is 
 this word when spoken by the Spirit of the Lord 
 to a disconsolate heart. To every mourner we 
 may say, on the authority of God, Fear not! 
 God will plead thy cause, and redeem thy soul." 
 Clarke.] 
 
 49. Ver. 60. [" Thou hast seen. Every- 
 thing is open to the eye of God. Distressed 
 soul! though thou knowest. not ichat thy enemies 
 meditate against thee ; yet He who loves thee 
 does, and will infallibly defeat all their plots, 
 and save thee." Clakke. — " As soon as any trial 
 assails us, we imagine that God is turned away 
 from us ; and thus our flesh tempts us to despair. 
 It is hence necessary that the faithful should in 
 this respect struggle with themselves and feel 
 assured that God has seen them. Though, then, 
 human reason may say, that God does not see, 
 but neglect and disregard His people, yet on the 
 other hand, this doctrine ought to sustain them, 
 it being certain that God does see them. This 
 is the reason why David so often uses this mode 
 of expression." Calvin.] 
 
 50. Ver. 60. " Quse hie tormenia, erunt illic orna- 
 menta. What are our torments here, will be our 
 ornaments there." Augustine. 
 
 51. Vers. 64-66. With regard to prayer against 
 enemies, see Doctrinal and Ethical remarks 
 on i. 20-22.— [Prayer. " Grant, Almighty God, 
 that as at this day ungodly men and wholly re- 
 probate so arrogantly rise up against Thy 
 Church, we may learn to flee to Thee, and to 
 hide ourselves under the shadow of Thy wings, 
 and fully to hope for Thy salvation ; and that, 
 however disturbed the state of things may be, 
 we may yet never doubt but that Thou wilt be 
 propitious to us, since we have so often found 
 Thee to be our deliverer; and that we may tlius 
 persevere in confidence of Thy grace and mercy, 
 and be also roused by this incentive to pray to 
 Thee, until having gone through all our miseries, 
 we shall at length enjoy tUat blessed rest which 
 Thou hast promised to us through Christ Jesus 
 our Lord. Amen." Calvin.] 
 
 HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 
 
 1. Vers. 1-18. The lamentation of the Prophet. 
 
 1. A source of consolation to the pious in severe 
 temptation. 2. A solemn warning to the ungodly. 
 "We learn, here, how God often permits even 
 His dearest children and the most holy of His 
 chosen ones to be deeply tempted on earth, that 
 they may have to some extent a taste of the agony 
 of Hell. . . . But the ungodly, who live in this 
 world tranquilly and happily, should regard the 
 case of the righteous as a mournful foretokening 
 of the pains of Hell, whereby they will yet, at 
 some time, as by a mighty thunder-clap, be 
 awakened out of their profound and dangerous 
 sleep of false security." Eg. Hunnius. 
 
 2. Vers. 19-21. How he who is tempted should 
 strengthen himself in severe affliction. 1. He should 
 lament his sorrow unto the Lord (pour out his 
 heart before Him, Ps. Ixii. 9 (8) ,• cii. 1 {title) ; 
 cxlii. 3 (2)). 2. He should be assured that God 
 is mindful of him (by Christ we have the know- 
 ledge of Divine Adoption, Rom. viii. 15, 16). 3. 
 He should, on this account, rejoice in hope 
 (Rom. xii. 12; 1 Thess. v. 16; Rom. v. 2). 
 
 3. Vers. 22, 23. Sermon on a special day of 
 fasting and prayer by the court-preacher Grue- 
 NEisEN, in Palmer's ev. Casual-Reden, Bd. 1., 
 S. '111. "Our text instructs us, 1. How God, 
 even in times of affliction, shows His regard for 
 us. 2. How we also, in such affliction, should 
 show our regard for God." 
 
 4. Vers. 22, 23. " With what we may comfort 
 ourselves when we feel that we are forsaken. 1. 
 The goodness of the Lord, that helps to sustain 
 us, so that we are not utterly overwhelmed. 2. 
 The compassion of the Lord, which we experi- 
 ence every day. 3. The faithfulness of the Lord, 
 which enables us to hope firmly in the fulfilment 
 of all His promises." Florey, bill. Wegiveiser 
 fiir geistliche Grabreden, Nr. 46. 
 
 6. Vers. 24, 25. " The happiness of a believing 
 soul even in painful circumstances. 1. The conso- 
 lation which it takes to itself, — God is my portion. 
 
 2. The resolution to which it is stimulated, — 1 
 will hope in Ilim. 3. The experience it makea 
 proof of, — the Lord is gracious." Florey, ib. 
 Nr. 47. 
 
 6. Vers. 26, 27. " The benefits of early affliction. 
 1. They teach at a time when men are most sus- 
 ceptible of instruction ; and they teach them 
 [what they most need to learn at that time of 
 life] to recognize the vanity of earthly things 
 and to give lieed to the Word of God. 2. They 
 purify at a time when the heart is in the greatesc 
 danger of being corrupted ; and they purify 
 them from [those besetting sins of youth] self- 
 ishness and sensuality. 3. They strengthen them 
 at a time when strength is weakest and tempta- 
 tions to sin are the strongest; and they strengthen 
 them especially to patient endurance on this 
 earth and separation from this earth." Floret, 
 ib. Nr. 48. See Trost und Mahnung an Grdbern, 
 a. Bdndch., S. 154. 
 
 7. Vers. 27-33. The chastisements of the Lord. 
 1. He chastises not for the sake of making men 
 miserable (ver. 33). 2. He chastises not for- 
 ever (vers. 31, 32). 3. He chastises that we may 
 learn, (1) patience (vers. 27, 28), (2) silence, 
 quietness (ver. 29), (3) meekness (ver. 30), (4) 
 hope (ver. 29). 
 
 8. Vers. 27-33. The Divine discipline. 1. Its 
 source; Love (vers. 31-33). 2. Its means; Sor- 
 
CHAP. III. 
 
 147 
 
 row and joy (vers. 27-33). 3. Its aim ; the per- 
 fecting of the man of God (vers. 27-30, see 2 
 Tim. iii. 17). 
 
 9. Vers. 31-33. *^ The blessed change with which 
 believing Christians may console themselves. 1. After 
 pain follows pleasure. 2. After death, life. 
 3. After separation, a restoration." Floret, as 
 above, Nr. 49. 
 
 10. Ver. 32. ^'■The history of the year's harvest an 
 iviag" of our history for the year. The resemblance 
 appears in these respects : 1. How finely the 
 whole country looked; 2. With what difficulty 
 it withstood the power of the storm; 3. How, 
 nevertheless, God's hand has protected us." 
 Bryek, S. E. (in Plauen), Harvest Sermon, 1866. 
 
 11. Vers. 37, 38. '' N'o misfortune happens with- 
 out God's will. 1. This is a great comfort to 
 those on whom misfortune has fallen ; for (1), 
 they will not vex themselves unnecessarily with 
 self-inflicted reproaches ; (2), they will be more 
 susceptible to the voice of the Gospel; (3), they 
 will humble themselves under the mighty hand 
 of God. 2. This is a strong support for the 
 confidence in God of those who properly consider 
 it ; for (I), they will be freer from anxious cares ; 
 (2), stronger in their reliance on God's guidance ; 
 (3), they will be more perfect in the spiritual 
 man. 3. This is a solemn warning to those who 
 embrace this opinion ; (1), that they do not sin 
 against the wisdom of God ; (2), that they do 
 not violate brotherly love ; (3), that they do not 
 forestall the judgment of God's word." Florey, 
 same as above, iVr. 251. See Trost und Mahnung 
 an Grabern, i. Bdchen. s. 216. 
 
 12. Vers. 18-39. Sermon of G. Chr. Deichert 
 on Midlent Sunday (see Stern aus Jakob, Stutlg., 
 Liesching, 1867: "This Lenten Sunday brings 
 us into sorrow's school, where we shall learn 
 liope in God, under severe chastisement and in 
 bitter trouble; where we shall learn submissive 
 meekness, and yet have hours of respite, when 
 we may take breath, gather fresh strength, and 
 address ourselves anew to the conflict. But the 
 first thing is that we pass the examination [or 
 trial for entrance into this school]." 
 
 13. Vers. 39-42. "Weighty words for every 
 one who is under the cross and in trouble. 
 This, then, is no time for unbelieving, impatient, 
 impenitent murmuring, but a time when we 
 should examine ourselves, and learn in what re- 
 spects we deserve what the Lord says to us, by 
 means of such chastisements, and when we should 
 submit patiently to His will, who smites us 
 righteously, and thus implore grace." Calwer 
 Handbuch Bibelerkldrung. — "If God chastises the 
 sinner, but with measure, so that He still spares 
 hia life, then should not man, whose life is 
 
 spared by the grace of God, lament on account 
 of God's righteousness, and on account of the 
 punishment of his own sins; rather every one 
 should lament on account of his own sin, which 
 has brought that punishment upon him ; every 
 one should complain of himself (not of God), for 
 this is an indication of true penitence." Lisco. 
 
 14. Vers. 39-42. The murmuring that is forbid- 
 den and that which is commanded. 1. Forbidden, 
 because unjustifiable, is murmuring over the evil 
 we are obliged to suffer as a punishment of our 
 sins (vers. 39, 42). 2. Commanded, is murmur- 
 ing over our sins, by which we have offended 
 God ; and this is right only when it results 
 (1), in sincere repentance (ver. 40) ; (2), in 
 hearty prayer for God's grace. 
 
 15. Vers. 44-50. Of wrestling with Godinprayer. 
 1. This presupposes an attack that God has made 
 upon us, through the cross and trouble (vers. 45- 
 47, comp. vers. 1-17). 2. It consists (1), on our 
 part, in vehement prayer (vers. 48, 49) ; (2), on 
 God's part, in the repeated rejection of our 
 prayer (ver. 44.) 3. It ends (1), on our part, 
 with believing perseverance in prayer; (2), on 
 God's part, with God-like acceptance of our 
 prayers (ver. 50). 
 
 16. Vers. 48-66. Prayer of the innocent and perse- 
 cuted man for help against his enemies. 1. Descrip- 
 tion of the wanton oppression of his enemies and 
 the heart-felt lamentation of the oppressed (vers. 
 48-54). 2. Whither this one had turned himself 
 [for help] in this difficulty. (Vers. 55-58; "We, 
 who had been cast, as it were, into the pit of 
 destruction and the abyss of terror and distress, 
 knew not whither to betake ourselves, except 
 unto Thee alone, Lord ! We called upon Thee 
 out of our anguished hearts, and Thou didst 
 hear us. Since Thou hast begun to hear, hide 
 not now Thine ears from our sighs and our 
 cries.") 3. Prayer, that God will not let the 
 wickedness of his enemies go unrevenged. (Vers. 
 59-66: "With Thee, truly, Lord, I have no- 
 thing to say, because one cannot answer Thee 
 for one thing of a thousand. But this we com- 
 mend to Thee, Lord, as the Righteous Judge, 
 that our enemies, without any justifying cause, 
 have tyrannized over us so grievously. Thou 
 hearest also their reproach, which is uttered not 
 only against us, but much more against Thy holy 
 name. Because they will not cease from this 
 outrageous insolence, do Thou then set about to 
 requite them, as they have deserved. Let their 
 heai't be terrified, that is now defiant ; let them 
 feel Thy curse, which now they despise'"). Fifth 
 Sermon of Eqid. Humnius on the 3d chap, of 
 Lamentations. 
 
148 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 Chapter IV. 
 
 ZiON'S QVlhX AND PUNISHMENT GEAPHICALLT DESCRIBED BY AN ETE-WITNESS, [OR THE SUFFEB- 
 INGS OP THE PEOPLE OF ALL GRADES AND RANKS OF SOCIETY. W. H. H.] 
 
 The Song consists plainly of four parts [or sections], vers. 1-6 ; 7-11 ; 12-16 ; 17-20 ; and a conclusion, yera. 21, 32. 
 
 PART I. Vers. 1-11. 
 
 Sect. I. Vers. 1-6. 
 
 {< Vbr. 1. How doth gold become dim ! 
 
 The choice gold change its color I 
 The hallowed stones are cast forth 
 At the head of every street. 
 '2 Ver. 2. The noble sons of Zion, 
 
 Who are equal in value to the purest gold, 
 How are they esteemed as earthen pitchers, 
 The work of the hands of the Potter ! 
 
 J Ver. 3. Even jackals drew out the breasts, 
 They suckled their whelps. 
 The daughter of my people became cruel, 
 Like ostriches in the wilderness. 
 1 Ver. 4. The tongue of the sucking babe cleaved 
 To the roof of his mouth for thirst : 
 Young children asked bread. 
 
 There was no one to break to them. 
 n Ver. 5. They that fed on dainties 
 Perished on the streets : 
 They that were borne on scarlet 
 Embraced heaps-of-dirt. 
 
 ) Ver. 6. For greater was the iniquity of the daughter of my people 
 Than the sin of Sodom, 
 Which was overthrown as in a moment 
 And no hands came against her. 
 
 Sec. II. Vers. 7-11. 
 
 r Ver. 7. Her princes were purer than snow, 
 Whiter than milk, 
 They were more ruddy in body than corals; 
 Their form — a sapphire. 
 n Ver. 8. Their visage became darker than blackness: 
 They were not known in the streets : 
 Their skin cleaved to their bones, 
 It became dry like a stick. 
 Ver. 9. Happier were those slain by the sword 
 Than these slain by famine. 
 Those pierced-ones, whose lives gushed forth 
 While yet there were fruits of the field. 
 * Ver. 10. The hands of tender-hearted women 
 Cooked their own children ; 
 They became food for th'^ni 
 
 In the ruin of the daughter of my people. 
 
CHAP. IV. 1, 2. 149 
 
 D Ver. 11. Jehovah fulfilled His fury ; 
 
 He poured out His fierce wrath. 
 And He kindled a fire in Zion, 
 
 And it consumed her foundations. 
 
 ANALYSIS. 
 
 [7%e first elegy related especially to the city of Jerusalem; the second, to Zion and the holy places; th» 
 third, to the sufferings of the prophet, as a representative of the spiritual Israel; this fourth elegy, 
 '•Hates to the sufferings of the people generally, embracing all classes. — W. H. H.] 
 
 The two parts, comprising the frst-half of the chapter, vers. 1 — 6, 7 — 11, correspond with each other, both 
 in matter and form. In the first part, vers. 1 — 6, is described the sad fate of the sons of Zion, noble 
 scions of the noblest lineage (Jer. ii. 21). A contrast is presented, not only between their great worth 
 and their pitiable fortune, but also between the fate that befell them, who constituted the living treasure 
 of Zion, and the fate of its material wealth, vers. 1, 2. Then is described the harrowing grief, caused 
 by the sufferings of little children, which could not possibly be relieved, vers. 3 — 5. Finally this part 
 closes with the general remark, that Zion's guilt, if inferred from these facts, had been even greater 
 than Sodom's, ver. 6. 
 
 In the second part, vers. 7 — 11, the Poet first describes the noble appearance and character of the Princes 
 of Judah, and then, in striking contrast, the frightful wrongs they had endured, vers. 7 — 9; a descrip- 
 tion which evidently constitutes a parallel to that contained in vers. 1, 2. So, also, parallel to ivhat 
 was said of the children in vers. 3 — 5, is what ice read on the same subject in ver. 10; only what 
 is here said in ver. 10, constitutes a climax to what was related in vers. 3 — 5. The second part, like 
 the first, ends with a general remark; Zion has suffered the full measure of Divine wrath, ver. 11. 
 
 IV. 1, 2. 
 
 1 How is the gold become dim ! how is the most fine gold changed ! the stones of 
 
 2 the sanctuary are poured out in the top of every street. The precious sons of Zion, 
 comparable to fine gold, how are they esteemed as earthen pitchers, the work of the 
 hands of the potter ! 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 1. nD'5<, see i. 1. — □ VV, Hophal only here ; elsewhere only Kal occurs, and that only twice, Ez. xxviii. 3 ; xxxi. 8. 
 If the signification of DOJ^, demanded by the context in Ez. xxviii. 3, is latere, — and in xxxi. 8, is obscurare, then it natu- 
 
 ~ T 
 
 rally follows that the signification of the Hophal here is obscurari; though it is not yet clearly apparent how this meaning 
 agrees with the idea of accumulation (Sammelns), which lies in the words Q^ TVZ^ DJ7- [Henderson ; "DOJ,' to congregaU, 
 Arabic, texit, obstruxit, as clouds, when collected, do the heavens ; hence to grow, or make dark, obscure the lustre of any- 
 thing. LXX €|naupuj0T)."]— NJE^'- With respect to its Aramaic form, see iii. 12 ; 2 Kings xxv. 29 ; Eccl. viii. 11. [Blatnet : 
 "Twenty-five MSS. and one edition read nJty'."] The word has the signification of ahum, diversum esse. — mutari, — only 
 in later Hebrew, Esth. i. 7 ; iii. 8 ; Mai. iii. 6 ; and that in accordance with the Chaldaic, which often uses XJi^ in this sense, 
 
 T T 
 
 Dan. iii. 27 ; v. 9 ; vi. 18.— □i13, is not found in Jer. ; it stands in parallelism with 2T^'t in Job xxxi. 24 ; Prov. xxv. 12 ; it 
 is used with Jt), Cant. v. 11. [The Sept. have apyvpcov, not because they read HD JD, I'Ut because they were unwilling to 
 repeat the word gold. Rosenmueller.] 
 
 Ver. 2. D''"1p'- In Jer. only in xv. 19.— xSd only here. The expression seems to be taken from Job xxviii. 16, 19, 
 • I: • T T 
 
 where we read of wisdom Dn33 nboH xb. H^D (xSd) is tollere, pendere. [Jerome translates amicM auro, which Cal- 
 
 •.■ ■.:•.•■■: T T T T 
 
 TIN prefers. "The value, and not the appearance is evidently meant," (Owen) ; it is the explanation of D'Tp% precious.— 
 
 W. H. H.]— 13 from US, secernere, purgare, does not occur in Jer. ; yet see x. 9. The article generalizes the meaning.— 
 Jer. never uses the Niphal 3l?n3-— "731 Jer. xiii. 12; xlviii. l2.—J:;-\r[, Jer. xix. 1 ; xxxii. 14. The construction with S, 
 as Is. xxix. 17 ; Ps. cvi. 31. Elsewhere, after 2Vr\} that with which the comparison is made is indicated by 3, DJ^, or 
 the simple nominative.— "IVV, frequent in Jer. x. 16; xviii. 2,3,4; xix. 1,11; etc. [No occasional use of a new word 
 can invalidate the presumption created by the use of the image of a potter's vessel, that Jeremiah was the author of this 
 poem.— W.U.H.]— The expression '•'' <•"' ntJ'j^O, occurs here only. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 1. How. That this soug also begins with 
 this exclamation (n3\N) is a strong argument 
 for the identity of the author. It is in the 
 highest degree improbable that different authors 
 not only composed alphabetical songs on the 
 same subject, but also began tlieni with the veiy 
 
 how is the most fine gold changed ! IIow 
 may gold become black, the precious treasure change 
 its color? The correct understanding of this 
 verse depends on the understanding of the next 
 verse and its relation to this verse. Thenius 
 would substitute in ver. 2, houses of Zion for sons 
 of Zion ('^3 instead of ""JS). Without dwelling 
 on the fact, that not the least critical evidence 
 for such a change of the text is offered, the con- 
 
 same word. How is the gold become dim! I text afforls sufficient evidence against it: for 
 
150 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 not. only would houses equal in value to gold be an 
 exaggerated hyperbole, but it is evident from the 
 antithesis involved in the expression the loork of 
 the hands of the potter, and also from the subject 
 of the parallel verses 7-9, that men are intended. 
 But if we retain the reading sons of Zion, and if 
 the meaning is that the sons of Zion. regarded 
 &i precious, are equal in value [^comparablel to gold, 
 then it is obvious in what sense gold and precious 
 stones are spoken of in ver. 1. It is not of the 
 fate of the Temple-gold and Temple-walls that he 
 speaks [Calvin, Boothroyd, Notes, and seem- 
 ingly Wordsworth] ; but the Poet asks how is 
 it possible that noble gold should lose its bright- 
 ness, that the precious stones should be thrown 
 upon the street? Thus, says he, has it happened to 
 the sons of Zion, who are such jewels. And thus, 
 what never happened in the case of material trea- 
 sures and jewels, has occurred in the case of 
 these living, metaphorical jewels. We take, then, 
 ver. 1, as a question, relating to what was likely 
 to happen according to the usual course of things. 
 This is involved in the use of the imperfect tense 
 in the Hebrew verbs [0^^', etc ), which refer to 
 matters not yet completed as, it was becoming dim 
 or obscured, etc. In any other sense the perfect 
 tense would have been necessary. Nor can these 
 imperfects be referred to the work of destruc- 
 tion while in course of execution (Thenius); for 
 it would certainly be very singular to represent 
 the Jews as saying, whilst the work of destruc- 
 tion was going on, "How is now the gold in the 
 Temple blackened by the smoke ! How now are 
 the stones of the Temple-wall rolled down!" 
 Those, over whose heads everything was going 
 to pieces, could not be thinking of such miuute 
 and particular details as these. Rather, in the 
 form of a question, what had never before been 
 known to happen, is here afiirmed. [The form 
 is interrogative, only so far as the interjection 
 of surprise suggests a question as to the possi- 
 bility of an event, else unparalleled. The construc- 
 tion is the same as in i. 1, How sitteth solitary the 
 city that, etc. ! So here, How doth gold become dim ! 
 That the reference is to men, and not to literal 
 gold and jewels, is the opinion of Blatney, Hen- 
 derson, RosENMUELLER, Gerlach and others. 
 Gerlach: "Since the chapter contains not one 
 word (unless here) of the destruction and rob- 
 bery of the Temple and palaces, but describes 
 especially what befell the men, rather than the 
 edifices of the city, (which latter theme had al- 
 ready been exhaustively discussed in chap, ii.), 
 therefore the first verse must not be taken liter- 
 ally and explained of the Temple and its orna- 
 ments (Ghald., Maurer, Kalkar, Thenius; see 
 i. 10). It is rather to be taken figuratively, 
 either generally of the fall of all that was high 
 and valuable in Israel, of which particular in- 
 stances are cited in what follows, or, as Michae- 
 Lis and RosENMUELLER have preferred, specifi- 
 cally, as explained by the following verse, which 
 interprets the ^oZc? and holy stones of ver. 1, by 
 the sons of Zion, whilst the words are throw7i down 
 at all the street- corners, find their explanation in 
 the more detailed description of ver. 5. Besides, 
 this designatiou of the sons of Zion as stones of 
 
 holiness (iyip~'J3S< i, has an analogy in the stones 
 of a crown ^p}l~'}2'A, precious stones) in Zeeh. ix. 
 
 16. From this it appears, how unauthorized is 
 the presumption (Michaelis, Rosenmueller), 
 which would perceive in the expression, stones of 
 holiness, a reference to the stones on the breast- 
 plate of the High Priest and, therefore, a desig- 
 nation of the Priests (whilst the gold denotes the 
 people generally, and the precious ore [^fne gold'] 
 the Princes), or would understand the words 
 stones of holiness as referring directly to the stones 
 on the breast-plate of the High Priest (Maurer 
 [Notes], see Bellermann, Urim u. Thum , 5'. 21. 
 'With the Israelites, thrown about dead on tlie 
 streets, on account of their sins, — the holy stones 
 — regarded as symbols of the people — will, at the 
 same time, be scattered about at the corners of 
 the streets.') The literal interpretation of the 
 stones as the stones of the walls of the Sanctuary, 
 by Thenius and Neumann. [Calvin, Booth- 
 ROTD, etc.], (in which case the words should be 
 
 2/"lpn~''J!3X), is controverted by the improbability 
 of their being scattered about through all the 
 streets of the city, — an opinion, which is not 
 made more acceptable by the conjecture of The- 
 nius, that all the streets of the city terminated 
 near the Temple in an open square, for in any 
 case the expression would then be very strongly 
 hyperbolical." — W. H. H.] — Become dim. — 
 The signification of the verb (0^^^% obscurari). is 
 to be taken, not in the sense of a momentary 
 effect, but of a continuous obscuration. For not 
 a superficial and transient, but a deep and abid- 
 ing depravation is affirmed in ver. 2, of the gold- 
 like sons of Zion. What is said, then, is this, 
 How can gold lose its bright lustre, and become 
 dull, tarnished, black? — [How. The repetition 
 of the how in the English version is as unneces- 
 sary here as in i. 1. — The most fine gold. — 
 The Hebrew word for gold here is not the same 
 Hebrew word used in the preceding clause. 
 Broughton has supplied the lack of an English 
 equivalent by retaining the Hebrew word: ffow 
 is the gold dimmed ! how is the pure cethern changed! 
 The Hebrew word (Or*^) has been vai-iously de- 
 rived and interpreted. Three explanations 
 have received the sanction of high authority (see 
 Lange's Comm., Cant. v. 11). It has been de- 
 rived from DflD, to hide, to hoard, hence esteemed 
 precious. So Barnes, Job xxxi. 24. Dr. Nae- 
 gelsbach seems to adopt this sense. The English 
 version also by using the superlative most tine 
 gold. But if the word itself nrnant precious go/d, 
 the addition of the adjective 31D, good, would be 
 superfluous. It has been derived, again, from 
 Dn3 in the supposed sense of being solid, dense, 
 hence massive gold: so Blatney, the best massy 
 gold. Others derive it from Dn3=Dt^n, to shine, 
 to glitter, and explain it of some very valuable 
 kind of metal like gold (so Gerlach the eo.s7/?/ ore, 
 or metal, Erz) ; or of a particular kind of gold that 
 shines and sparkles, genus auri fulgentis, a micando 
 (Fuerst's Concordance). This last meaning seems 
 to agree best with the sense here, the use of the 
 word in Cant. v. 11, and the very peculiar use of 
 the verb in Jer. ii. 22. According to Rosen- 
 MUELLER, Chaldeaus rendered it V\,splendor, the 
 Syriac and Jerome, color. — Changed, faded or 
 changed its color. Gerlach: " This can only de- 
 note a change of color, or loss of brightness, since 
 
CHAP. IV. 3-5. 
 
 iiil 
 
 the gold could not be cliauged in its substance." 
 W. H. H.] — The stones of the Sanctuary- 
 are poured out in the top of every street. 
 
 Thrown down are the stones of the sanctuari/ ^.■itones 
 of holiness, or consecrated stones^ at the corners of 
 all the streets. The expression stones of the sanctu- 
 ary (K^'lp 'J3K), is found only here. By itself it 
 might properly denote the stones of the Temple 
 walls, particularly since these are also called 
 costly stones (r»'l"ljT D\J3X), 1 Kings t. 31 (17); 
 vii. 9-11. But who would take the trouble to 
 carry these away and pour them out in the cor- 
 ners of the streets? What Thenius says of the 
 concentration of the principal streets at the foot 
 of the Temple hill, is very problematical. Be- 
 sides, the connection requires the sense of pre- 
 cious stones: for with such, not with wall-stones, 
 however excellent, are the Sons of Zion com- 
 pared as precious (D'Tp'), and precious stones 
 (iT^p' pX), are often named, as here, in connec- 
 tion with "gold, 2 Sam. xii. 30; 1 Kings x. 2, 10, 
 11. In regard to the use of precious stones in 
 the Sanctuary, they were not only attached to 
 the garments of the High Priest (Ex. xxviii. 9, 17- 
 20; xxxix. 6, 10-13), but they were employed 
 for ornamenting the Temple itself (2 Chron. iii. 
 6; 1 Chron. xxix. 2). Who would pour out such 
 valuable stones in the corners of all the streets, that 
 is to say, in the first corner one happened to 
 come to? Even the enemy did not do that. Yet 
 this thing happened to the sons of Zion though 
 they were most precious jewels. 
 
 Ver. 2. The precious sons of Zion, — Zion's 
 sons, the noble ones (D''"^p"n, comp. m"lp\ honorable 
 women, Ps. xlv. 10 (9) ). That we are to under- 
 stand here by the sons of Zion, the nobility of the 
 people [Calvin, Henderson], I do not believe. 
 The expression.is too comprehensive, and nothing 
 prevents our understanding the following pre- 
 dicates of the chosen people generally,* who 
 
 * [Gerlach would narrow the meaning down to the littie 
 thUaren referred to vers. 3, 4, and explains their being called 
 
 were in their totality a kingdom of priests (Ex. 
 xix. 6). The Princes are spoken of for the first 
 time in the second part, vers. 7-11, which con- 
 stitutes throughout the climax of the first part. 
 — Comparable to fine gold, who are equal in 
 value to gold [lit., tliose who are weighed with pure 
 gold. Henderson: "As what is weighed is es- 
 timated according to the contents of the opposite 
 scale, the verb came to be employed in the sense 
 of comparing one thing with another. Comp. 
 Job xxviii. 16, 19.'] — Pine gold, T3, is pure, 
 solid gold. [This is still another Hebrew word 
 for gold, indicating its quality. Broughton 
 anglicizes it, Fest,e ore, as he does Dj13 in ver. 1, 
 which he calls cethern. Blaynet : the purest gold. 
 — W. H. H.] They are estimated by the gold, that 
 is to say, their value is represented by a mass of 
 gold, the weight of which is equal to their own. 
 The expression is figurative. — How. [The repe- 
 tition of this word HD'X, is forcible. It serves 
 
 T 
 
 to connect this verse with ver. 1, anxl to continue 
 and complete the sentence begun with the same 
 word in ver. 1. It shows that one idea of horror 
 and amazement pervades the whole sentence, and 
 hence that the ^oW,c/;o(ce^oW, and hallowed stones, 
 of ver. 1, are identical with the precious sons of 
 Zion, in ver. 2. — W. H. H.]. — Are they es- 
 teemed as earthen pitcheis^potsherd-pitchc7-s 
 — the ■work of the hands of the potter! 
 [Wordsworth: "As Jeremiah himself had repre- 
 sented them to be shattered in pieces for their 
 sins, xix. 10. 11." Gataker: "As bottles of 
 sherd, or earthen stuff, soJer. xix. 1, 10; as things 
 of no repute or worth, 2 Cor. iv. 7. See Jer. 
 xxii. 28." Geklach: "The point of comparison 
 is the worthlessness of the material out of which 
 they are made, see Is. xlv. 9."] 
 
 precious, comparable to gold, by passages in which children 
 are represented as of more value than any other gift of God, 
 Gen. XV. 2 ; x.\x. 1 ; Ps. cxxvii. 3. There is no necessity for 
 this. It is much more natural to take these two introduc- 
 tory verses as embracing a general description of the humilia- 
 tion of the whole people. The verse* that follow give us the 
 details of the picture, with reference to particular classes of 
 people.— W. H. H.] 
 
 IV. 8-5. 
 
 3 Even the sea-monsters draw out tlie breast, they give suck to their young ones : 
 
 4 the daughter of my people is become cruel, like the ostriches in the wilderness. The 
 tongue of the sucking child cleaveth to the roof of his mouth for thirst ; the young 
 
 6 children ask bread, and no man breaketh it unto them. They that did feed deli- 
 cately are desolate in the streets ; they that were brought up in scarlet embrace 
 dung-hills. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 3. — \V-^r\ (K'ri, D'^jl). Sea-monsters, E. V., Boothroyd : sea-calves, E. V. marg. : dragons, Beoughton, Blatnet, 
 OWBN ; serpent, Calvin ; jackals, Henderson, Notes, Fuerst, Lex. : wolves, Oerlach : wild-dogs, Thenius.] — V /PI, never 
 used in Jeremiah, is used of pulling off the shoe, in Deut. xxv. 9, 10 ; Is. xx. 2. The sense of drawing, seems to lie at the 
 foundation of this root (see Hos. v. 6). Whether a second root V Sn (from which comes Vl/D, <"*« equipped, a warrior} 
 may be affirmed, or whether the original identity of both may be established, we cannot now stop to inquire. — ^I^, mamma, 
 Jeromiah never uses [because he never had occasion to speak of the female breasts or teats. — W. II. U.] — Of the verb p3'> 
 .Icn-miah uses only once the Particij)le pj V, xliv. 7, in a substantive sense. [The only tiiiif Jeroniiali in his prophecies h.»d 
 occasion ti speak of a. suckling, or make any allusion to a mother's uursiuj; a child at the brea^., he uses the participie of 
 
152 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 theTerbpJV What verb then would Jeremiah have been more likely to use in this place ?—W. H. H.J—n-U. younjr-one 
 [whelp], is found once in Jeremiah, in the form nij. li-38, see Nah. ii. 13.— '^^'-,13. See ii. 11 ; iii. 48.— 1I3X7- The 
 
 verb to be or become must be supplied. See Ewald, g 217 d, a. TOX (Jeremiah uses only "'IT^X, ^i- 23 ; xxx. 14 ; 1. 42) is 
 
 T : - -Ti- 
 
 the cruel ont. Job xxx. 21. We would expect the feminine form : but that is never used, and, besides, the masculine form 
 seems intended to convey the idea of unwomunly, unmotherly ; it is as if it were said, Zion has become a hardened man. — 
 D'jy ^2- The Masorites connect the two words and read D''JJ7"'3- It is true that 'l^'' occurs only here (elsewhere the 
 ostrich is called H Ji^'-HS, the daughter of screeching, Mic. i. 8 ; Job. xxx. 29, etc.). Yet the K'ri is to be approved of. For, 
 on the one hand, the separation could easily happen by mistalto ; and, on the other hand, D'JJ^) as the K'tib has it, gives 
 no satisfactory sense. It must be translated. For criers (Heuler) in the wilderness (are they.) To supply 71311 here is dif- 
 ficult, and who are the criers in the wilderness? The children, or (as others prefer) their parents? [Forty-live of Kenni- 
 cott's JISS., and seventy-seven of De Rossi's, and most of the early printed editions of the 15th century, according to Hen- 
 derson and Gerlach, have D' JJ?''3> without any reference to another reading, " Neumann, in support ul' the Utib, would 
 
 understand by the crying ones (Ileulenden) the ivild beasts of the wilderness, as the Venetian Greek, cus o-eip^ves " (Gerlach). 
 — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 4. — f)2,) p^T. The same phrase is found in Job xxix. 10; Ps. cxxxvii. 6; comp. xxii. 10 (15); Ez. iii. 26, where 
 
 Sx is used. — Jeremiah uses ^n never [because he never had occasion to, not happening ever to speak of the palate, or roof 
 
 of the mouth.— yV. H. H.]. 7)21 twice, xiii. 11 ; xlii. 16: pJV once, xliv. 7 : JltJ^S frequently, v. 15; ix. 2, 4, 7, etc.: JJD^ 
 
 once for XO-^, xlviii. 18.— □"'771^. See i. 5; ii.l9; Jer. vi.ll; ix. 20 (21).— Ji'^3, a scribal variety for D"^i3, as Mic. iii. 
 
 ■• T ■ T 
 
 3 ; see Is. Iviii. 7 ; .Ter. xvi. 7. 
 
 Ver. 5.— SdX is frequently constructed with 3 (Ex. xii. 43-45 ; Lev. ii. 11 ; Jud. xiii. 16), but nowhere except here with 
 
 S- Boucher urges the 7, and translates admitted to dainties, or directed to dainties [^ having a local sense, as 2 Sam. ix. 
 
 7, or Job xii. 8. See Thenius]. Thenius supposes the allusion to be rather to the external surroundings of delicate food, 
 
 than to the food itself. But it is not apparent how 73X can mean to admit, to direct, or how 7 can denote something around. 
 
 If S is to be explained as a Hebraism, tlien we must adopt a pregnant construction, and regard 7 as dependent on an omitted 
 
 verb of craving after, longing for. See Prov. xxiii. 3, 6, Vr\l:3 L'UrDS IXHjT Sx, comp. xxiv. 1. To eat after dainties would, 
 
 T - : - : T : • 
 then, be the same as seeking to eat such. Our book, however, was written at a time when an Aramaic expression cannot 
 
 surprise us. Besides, there is found in Jeremiah an undoubted example of this Aramaic 7j as a nota accusativi, xl. 2. [Note 
 
 this as a mark of Jeremiac authorship, that is a set-off, at least, against many of the trivial exceptions to his style.— W. H. 
 
 H.] See Ewald, §277, e. [Gesenius Or., § 151, e. " It is a solecism of the later style, when active verbs are construed with 
 
 ^7, instead of the accusative, as 7 70X, Lam. iv. 5." — Gerlach takes the whole expression adverbially, nach Herzenslust 
 : : - T 
 
 assen, they ate according to their heart's desire.— W. H. H.]— D''J1^0- See Gen. xlix. 20 ; 1 Sam. xv. 32; Prov. xxix. 17. 
 
 ■'j'ly.'O, Jer. Ii. 34, is composed of f 3 and D"'Jiy (Ps. xxxvi.9 (8); 2 Sam. i. 24.— ?r3t!'J- See Jer. iv. 9; Ez. iv. 17, where 
 -T-- ■■ ' ■ ■ T-: T 
 
 the word is used as here of persons.— 'OX is the technical word for the nurture of children : see ?0X, Num. xi. 12 ; Is. xlix. 
 
 I - T ' ■■ 
 
 23 ; 2 Kings x. 1, 5 ; Esth. ii. 7 : fl J*DXi Kuth iv. 16 ; 2 Sam. iv. 4. The fundamental meaning seems to be to carry, support, 
 raiseup; see HJOX « co'"'"'*, tOX> T1JX, the one who erects a building, the architect. □"'J'SX are then piestaii, seels. Ix. 
 4. Jeremiah uses Niphal, xv. 18 ; xlii. 5, and Hiphil, xii. 6; xl. 14, but only in an ethical sense.— J^7in does not occur in 
 Jeremiah.— The word ri'lj"^3U?X occurs only here. The plural niBK^X in 1 Sam. ii. 8 ; Ps. cxiii. 7; Neh. ii. 13 ; iii. 13, 14; 
 xii. 31. The signification is undoubtedly dirt (Koth). For its derivation, see Ewald, § 1S6, e; Olsh., § 211, a.— The verb 
 pDH) Jeremiah uses in no form. Piel is to embrace. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 3. Vers. 1, 2, describe the misfortunes of 
 Zion from a theocratic point of view ; vers. 3-5 
 show how terrible they were, as seen from a 
 natural point of view, by describing the piti- 
 able misery of the poor children: see i. 5; 
 ii. 11, 12, 19, 20. Even the sea-monsters 
 (niarg. sen-rdlvcf;) ^Jiiclcils, or wolvesl dravy out 
 [_drcw-ou/~\ the breast, they give \_fjavc'\ suck 
 to their young ones. Tliat the Hebrew word 
 translated sea-monsters, "Y^y^, here stands for 
 ^''^r\ = jackals (see Jer. ix. 10 (11); x. 22; 
 xiv. 6, etc.), was an opinion of the Masorites, 
 which many of the moderns have adopted from 
 the Syriac. In fact, "j"— is the Aramaic plural 
 ending (see Olsh. § 111 b), which would not be 
 surprising here, y^^, as a singular (see Jer. 
 Ii. 34) is bellua maritima (see Gen. i. 21), which 
 is defined at one time as a dragon, at another as 
 
 a whale, at another as a crocodile, at another as a 
 serpent (comp. Ex. vii. 9, 10; Deut. xxxii. 23; 
 Ps. Ixxiv. 13, etc.). That the sea-monsters draw 
 out for use the teats, which are contained in the 
 breasts as in bags or sheaths, Bochart (in the 
 Hierozoicon, torn. iii. p. 777, ed. Rosenmiiller) 
 authenticates, by many evidences, as a fact 
 known to the ancients. There is on this account, 
 therefore, no reason for departing from the sense 
 indicated by the text. [There are, however, 
 several other reasons for regarding this word as 
 an Aramaic plural for jackals or for wolves (Ger- 
 lach), which belong to the same family. These 
 are, 1. The plural forms of the verbs (drew out, 
 gave suck) and of the suffix (their young-ones), 
 which would require D^J'^IjI? instead of yJ^, if 
 sea-monsters were intended. 2. The fact that "lU 
 is used of the whelps of lions, bears, dogs, and 
 animals of similar species, o. The autliority of 
 the Masorites. 4. The frequent occurrence of 
 Aramaic forms in Jeremiah's writings. 5. Tlie 
 agreement, of so many versions and commenta- 
 
CHAP. IV. 3-5. 
 
 153 
 
 tors, ancient and modern. 6. The probability 
 that jackals, wolves, or animals of that descrip- 
 tion, would occur to the mind of the Prophet in 
 connection with the events of which he speaks. 
 There was nothing to suggest the monsters of the 
 deep, and the comparison, if referred to them, 
 seems forced and far-fetched. But as the Pro- 
 phet recalls the consequences of the destruction 
 of Jerusalem, as he remembers how the foxes 
 even now had possession of the mountain of Zion, 
 V. 18, he cannot forget how hungry beasts of 
 prey had revelled in the land, and prowled about 
 the deserted villages and even the streets of Je- 
 rusalem itself. Even those beasts had shown the 
 instincts of natural affection at least. And hence 
 the natural contrast between them and the 
 mothers, who, before the beasts appeared on the 
 scene, forsook their own babes and refused to 
 give them nourishment. It should be observed 
 here that the verbs in this verse and in all the 
 following description are in the past time. The 
 Prophet ia describing what had happened ; not 
 what was then transpiring. This use of the per- 
 fect tense shows that he was referring, not in 
 the abstract, to what it is in the nature of jackals 
 to do, but in the concrete, to what, had been 
 actually observed of them. Even (the DJ is 
 emphatic) jackals, that infested the depopulated 
 country, drew out their breast, etc. — The expres- 
 sion cirawew^ om< the breast is suggested by the 
 common habit of women in drawing out the 
 breast from the covering robe and presenting it 
 to the child ; a mulieribus lactantibus, quse laxatd 
 veste mammam lactanti prsebent (Junius, quoted by 
 Gerlach). — W. H. H.] — The daughter of my 
 people ia become cruel, \became cruel. Lit. 
 was turned into a cruel one (Gataker), see Job 
 XXX. 21. Calvin says: ''The daughter of my 
 people is come to the cruel one, for the people had 
 to do with nothing but cruelty, . . . He, then, does 
 not accuse the people of cruelty, that they did 
 not nourish their children, but on the contrary, 
 he means that they were given up to cruel ene- 
 mies." But the preceding part of this verse and 
 what follows in vers. 4, 5, and especially in the 
 climax presented in ver. 10, require the sense 
 given in our English version, in which the ver- 
 sions agree with great unanimity. The Prophet 
 gives us a frightful instance of the effect of suf- 
 fering and starvation. Mothers became more 
 unnatural than jackals or hyenas that suckle 
 their young; and forsook thjir babes, not merely 
 to avoid the sight of pains they could not allevi- 
 ate, but to escape the exhausting demands upon 
 their own waning strength, — nay, the mania 
 induced by extreme suffering destroyed their 
 affection for their children — W.H. H.] — Like 
 the ostriches in the -wilderness. In refer- 
 ence to the want of feeling towards its young in 
 the ostrich, Thenius refers to Oken's Natural 
 History (vii. s. 655, _^.). See Bochart, Hieroz. 
 P. II. L. II. cap. 14, pag. 824; cap. 17, pag. 854 
 seqq. ed Rosbnm. — Winbb R. W. B. s. v. 
 
 Strauss. Job xxxix. 13-17. [" On the least 
 noise or trivial occasion she forsakes her eggs 
 or her young ones, to which perhaps she never 
 returns ; or if she does, it may be too late either 
 to restore life to the one, or to preserve the lives 
 of the others. Agreeably to this account, the 
 Arabs meet sometimes with whole nests of these 
 eggs undisturbed ; some of them are sweet and 
 good, others are addled and corrupted ; others 
 again have their young ones of different growth, 
 according to the time, it may be presumed, they 
 may have been forsaken of the dam. They often 
 meet with a few of the little ones no bigger 
 than well-grown pullets, half-starved, straggling, 
 and moaning about, like so many distressed 
 orphans, for their mother." (Shaw's Travels, 
 quoted by Notes). " The Arabs call the ostrich 
 the impious or ungodly bird, on account of its 
 neglect and cruelty towards its young," (Barnes 
 on Job xxxix. 13).] 
 
 Ver. 4. The tongue of the sucking child 
 cleaveth [^cleaved] to the roof of his mouth 
 for thirst. See Job xxix. 10; Ps. cxxxvii. 6, 
 comp. xxii. 16 (15) ; Ez. iii. 26. — Young chil- 
 dren ask l^asked] bread [see ii. 11, l".i], and 
 no man breaketh it unto them [and there 
 was no one to break to them~\. 
 
 Ver. 5. They that did feed delicately, 
 they that ate dainties [or, fed on dainties, Calvin, 
 Blayney, Boothroyd, Henderson, Noyes]. — 
 Are desolate in the streets, perish [perished'\ 
 on the streets, [}'. e. by starvation, while seeking 
 in vain for food. — W. H. IL] — They that were 
 brought up in scarlet, they who were carried on 
 crimson [carried on cloths, or borne on couches 
 of scarlet, crimson, or purple color, made of 
 costly materials of Tyrian dyes. — W.H.H.] Scar- 
 let, the red dying material, got from the cochi- 
 neal worm; see Ex. xvi. 20; Is. i. 18. — Embrace 
 dunghills, embrace the dirt [embraced dirt-heaps, 
 the heaps of dirt, refuse {rubbish, Fuerst's Lex.), 
 lying in the streets of the city.— W. H. H.] To 
 embrace the dirt (see Job xxiv. 8, embrace the rock) 
 can only mean to have it between the arms, 
 which is done by them who lie in the dirt. Ster- 
 quilinea arripiunt, et super ea veluti toto corpore in- 
 cumbunt, ut fame confecti cibum inde eruant. (They 
 eagerly grasp the dunghills, stretched out upon 
 them, as it were at full length, that, dying of 
 hunger, they may thence seize their food). — 
 Pareau. [The idea of seeking food in the dirt- 
 heaps of the city streets, confuses the two very 
 distinct members of this verse. Little children, 
 who had been fed on delicacies, perished in the 
 streets while vainly seeking food ; and thus, 
 those, who had been borne on costly couches 
 covered with the richest goods, lay now dying, 
 with outstretched hands embracing, as it were,- 
 the heaps of filth in the city streets. To embrace 
 the dust is a familiar image in all languages : to 
 embrace the dirt-heaps of an oriental city, so 
 proverbially filthy, intensifies the figure. The 
 whole description is highly poetical. — W. H. H.] 
 
154 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 IV. 6. 
 
 6 For the punishment of the iniquity of the daughter of my people is greater than 
 the punishment of the sin of Sodom, that was overthrown as in a moment, and no 
 hands stayed on her. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 6. The expression riD^Sn is taken from Gen. xix. 25 (□■'^y^l~^^X "^tTi '1, comp. Jer. xx. 16, and r\3£3n02Ji 
 T -: • TV V I -:|~ -••:-: 
 
 Deut. xxix. 22 ; Is. xiii. 19 ; Am. iv. 11 ; Jer. 1. 40). — !| 7n is derived, not from 7!|n, but from 71 /H (so derived apparently 
 
 T T T 
 
 by the Sept. and Syr.). The latter denotes to relax, to be po^verless, Judg. xvi. 7 ; Is. Ivii. 10 ; it can also very well be said 
 »f the hands, and there is no necessity of resorting, by any artificial method, to a modification of the idea of gyrare. In 
 reference to this word, see Jer. v. 3. Jer. uses the Kal of 7^J, v. 27, and the Hiphil, xlviii. 26, 42. — Tiy is frequent with 
 him, ii. 22; iii. 13: xiii. 22; etc.— ■'r3_J?-r\3, see ii. 11.— riXtDFl often in Jer. xvi. 10; xvii. 13; etc.— j;jn also, iv. 20; 
 xviii. 7, 9. — ^^J1~103 occurs only here ; yet see J^J'^3, Num. xvi. 21; xvii. 10; Ps. xiii. 19. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 6. With this verse the Poet concludes the 
 first part of his Song. This verse corresponds 
 to ver. 11, which constitutes a similar conclusion. 
 In both cases the Poet draws a general inference 
 from the preceding particular facts, which he 
 had related in detail. In this verse the inference 
 is, that the guilt of Zion was proved to be greater 
 than the sin of Sodom. — For the punishment 
 of the iniquity (marg. For the i/iiquiti/) of the 
 daughter of my people is greater than the 
 punishment of the sin of Sodom. — And the 
 guilt of the daughter of my people loas greater than 
 the sin of Sodom. I cannot agree with those who 
 take ']')}? and PXtSn in the sense of the punish- 
 ment of sin. This sense is not capable of proof. 
 In all the cases appealed to for this purpose 
 (Gen. iv. 13; 1 Sam. xxviii. 10; 2 Sam. xvi. 1'-'; 
 Is. v. 18 ; Ps. xxxi. 11), on more exact examina- 
 tion, their original meaning of sin, guilt, appears 
 to be their real meaning. And this is true in 
 reference to nxtOn, for which some would justify 
 the sense of poena peccati, from the passages Num. 
 xxxii. 23; Is. xl. 2 ; Zech. xiv. 9. See Drech- 
 
 SLER on Is. V. 18. In /"^r] ^ was greater, lies, 
 then, the thought, it being allowable to infer the 
 cause from the effect, that Zion's guilt is shown 
 to be greater tlian was the sin-guiltiness (Siin- 
 denschuld) of Sodom. There is certainly in the 
 
 vav before 7^r a causal intimation. For it 
 
 amounts to the same thing, as far as the sense is 
 concerned, whether I infer the eifect from the 
 cause with the words and so, or the cause from 
 .the effect with the word /or. This causal use of 
 the vav, moreover, is sufficiently established ; 
 see Ps. vii. 10; Ix. 13; xcv. 5; Prov. xxiii. 3; 
 Gen. xxii. 12; Jer. xvi. 12; xxiii. 36; xxxi. 3; 
 Is. xxxix. 1; Hos. iv. 4; vi. 4; etc. See my 
 Gr. § 110, 1. [The Vav coordinates the propo- 
 sition with what precedes in the relation of cause 
 to effect. These things were so, for the sin was 
 greater, etc. As the vav is here the initial letter, 
 the stress laid upon it shows the masterly man- 
 ner in which tlie author of the poem often makes 
 the acrostic, which in common hands would be 
 constrained and merely artificial, contribute to 
 
 the spirit and force of the sentiment. This is 
 true, whether we take the words discussed, in the 
 sense of sin or the punishment oj sin; but the fact 
 that it is emphatic is an argument in favor of the 
 sense in which Dr. Naegelsbach construes it, 
 
 and this added to the doubt whether "j-ij^ and 
 nXISn ever do mean the punishment of sin, may 
 decide us in favor of his translation. The other 
 translation gives good sense and fits in admi- 
 rably witli the context, and is adopted without 
 hesitation by all the English versions and com- 
 mentators (except Wordsworth), and by Calvin 
 and Gerlach. Yet Calvin says: "If any one 
 prefers the other version, I will not contend, for 
 it is not unsuitable ; and hence also a most useful 
 doctrine may be drawn, that we are to judge of 
 the grievousness of our sins by the greatness of 
 our punishment; for God never exceeds what is 
 just when He takes vengeance on the sins of men. 
 Then His severity shows how grievously men 
 have sinned. Tlius, Jeremiah may have reasoned 
 from the effect to the cause, and declared that 
 the people had been more wicked than the Sodo- 
 mites. Nor is this unreasonable; for . . . the 
 Prophets everywhere charged them as men who 
 not only equalled but also surpassed the Sodo- 
 mites, especially Ezekiel (xvi. 46, 47). Isaiah 
 also called them the people of Gomorrah, and the 
 king's counsellors and judges, the princes of 
 Sodom (Is. i. 9, 10). This mode of speaking is 
 then common in the Prophets, and the meaning 
 is not unsuitable." The Sept. translates both 
 words avouia; the Vulg. one iniquitas, the other 
 peccatum. — W. H. H.]. — Thatv^as overthrovrn 
 as in a moment. Sodom's guilt was great, and 
 the punishment decreed for it cori-esponded to 
 the greatness of its sin: it was destroyed instan- 
 taneously by fire falling from Heaven (see Gen, 
 xix. 25), wliereby its punisliment was proved to 
 be supernatural and divinitus immissa [sent from 
 God]. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands 
 of tlielivingGod (Heb. X. 31). [Bl.wney: "Sodom 
 was destroyed by a sudden act of God, which the 
 Prophet thinks preferable to lingering and wast- 
 ing away with disease or want, as was the case in 
 Jerusalem during the long siege."] — And no 
 hands stayed on her — andnohands became slack 
 [relaxed) the rehij. Tiiat Sodom was destroyed, not 
 by the hands of men, but by the hand of God 
 
CHAP. IV. 7-9. , 155 
 
 alone, is a fact that is emphasized as giving in- to the suddenness of the destruction, and form* 
 tensity to the severity of its punishment. Yet, ing a parallelism with the preceding clause, over- 
 our Poet would say, the fate of Jerusalem waa throvm as in a moment. Owen translates, and not 
 still more terrible, because its guilt was greater wearied against (or over) her were hands, and says, 
 than Sodom's. With what propriety this could " This is substantially the Sept. and Syr. Gro- 
 be affirmed, is easily comprehended. For there tius says that the meaning is, that Sodom was 
 had not been on the part of Sodom and Gomorrah ! destroyed not by human means, that is, not by a 
 such fulness of manifestation of the long-suifer- siege as Jerusalem had been." Wordsworth: 
 ing love of God, as in the case of Jerusalem, (see ; ^'■Andno handswere weary on her. No human hands 
 Jer. vii. 13, 25; xi. 7; xxv. 4; Ez. xvi. 46-48; j were wearied by destroying her, but she was 
 Is. i. 10; Matt. xi. 23, 24). But if it be asked, [ suddenly consumed by the hand of God." If we 
 in what respect Jerusalem's fate had been more 
 dreadful than that of Sodom, the answer, it seems 
 to me, is contained in the J^J^~iD3=as in a mo- 
 ment. Sodom's sufferings in death were brief: 
 there were no starving children, no mothers who 
 cooked their children. Jerusalem's sufferings 
 
 accept of the usual derivation of the verb from 
 
 7^n, then the translation of Thenius may be 
 commended for its simplicity, and is supported 
 by the dual form of U]'~\''=hands, and no one in her 
 icrnny the hands. But, as Gerlach shows, the 
 
 were long and protracted, whereby was produced ^1"''' *'oi'°i is constantly used for the plural (see 
 that horrible crime! Eversio Sodomse fuit t«s<ar Q'T-'^^, all hands, Is. xiii. 7), and the verb Sm 
 subitse apoplexise, eversio autem Hierosolymx fuit -"^7 •,-»,, ,. „, ,. , 
 
 instar lentx tabis [the overthrow of Sodom was a ^' ""^'^ '^"^ ? "^ ^^^ o^J^^t' of brandishing the 
 kind of sudden apoplexy, but the overthrow of sword against the cities of Ephraim (Hos. xi. 6): 
 
 Jerusalem was a kind of slow consumption], says 
 FoKSTER [Dr. Naegelsbach has not made his 
 sense of this difficult clause very apparent. It 
 seems hardly credible that T\'2 should mean there- 
 by (dadurch). If the verb is derived from ThX\, 
 instead of 7^n, the translation of either Blat- 
 
 we may, therefore, understand the seuse to be, 
 and no hands (i. e., human hands) were wrung 
 round (or brandished) against it, men's hands were 
 not brought against it. This seems to correspond 
 with Dr. Naegelsbach's interpretation, and is 
 the sense generally adopted. Boothroyd: With- 
 out the hands of men. Henderson: And no hands 
 
 NET or Owen, is to be preferred. 'B'lky-h^yI attacked her. '^oyes; Though no hands came against 
 translates nor were hands weakened in her, referring her. — W. H. H.] 
 
 IV. 7-9. 
 
 7 Her Nazarites were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, they were 
 
 8 more ruddy in body than rubies, tlieir polishing ivas of sapphire : Their visage is 
 blacker than a coal ; they are not known in the streets ; their skin cleaveth to their 
 
 9 bones ; it is withered, it is become like a stick. They that be slain with the sword 
 are better than they that he slain with hunger : for these pine away, stricken through 
 for want of the fruits of the field. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 7. — !|2)T. The word occurs only in Job xv. 15 ; xxv. 5 ; and in Hiph., Job ix. 30. — T^IJ does not occur in Jeremiah. 
 
 ~ 'T 
 
 [Yet 'n'lTJ, Jer. vii. 29, is aremarkable coincidence in the use of language, if D'TIJ means crowned-ones, as Dr. Naegelsbach 
 guggesta. — W. H. H.] — J7ty, Jer. xviil. 14. — The verb Pn^, splendidum esse, nitere, is found only here. The adjective H^f 
 
 in Jer. iv. 11.— 3*7)1 in Jeremiah only In the phrase M ^/H iUT V^N, xi. 5; xxxii. 22. — Kal DIX is found only here. 
 
 T T T T ~T I '.■ V - T 
 
 The sense without liuubt is <o6erc(f, reddish. The same meaning adheres to the derived conjugations, Pual (Ex. xxv. 5, xxvi. 14; 
 
 XXXV. 7, 23 ; Keh. ii. 4), Hiph. (Is. i. IS), HitUpael (Is. i. 18). The word does not occur in Jeremiah. — Di'J^ (in Jer. viii. 1 ; 
 
 XX. 9; xxiii. 9) stands here as pars pro toto. See Prov. xv. 30; xvi. 24; and D^f^', Ps. cxxxix. 15. [Blatney absurdly 
 
 translates, They were ruddier on the bone, and thus explains, " In the preceding line the whiteness of their skin is de- 
 
 icribed; in this their flesh, which was red underneath towards the bone, marking their high health."] — T'3D (see Ez. i. 
 
 26 ; X. 1) does not occur in Jeremiah. 
 
 Ver. 8. — 'nt^n- Jeremiah uses the Hiphil, only once, xiii. 16. — "lint!' occurs only here (see lintJ'. Jer. ii. 18). [The 
 
 translation of Blatnet, duskier than the dawn, and of Hendekson, darker than the dawn, would require us to read inE?, imd 
 
 then the comparison could only be with the darkness of the very early dawn, and would be an awkward figure at that. — W. 
 
 H. U.J — DlXn. See Jer. xi. 16.— 03J) Niph. of UJ, see Prov. xxvi. 24 ; Job xxxiv. 19. In Jeremiah Piel is found, xix. 4, 
 
 tt:|t : • " t . 
 
 «nd Fiphil xxiv. 5. — ^^V,Jirm^■<er adhserere, only here. — D"1iy, see iii. 4. — cljl E'3*, see Jos. ii. 5. In Jeremiah the verb 
 
 -T . T -T 
 
 ^3' is often found, xxiii. 10 ; 1. 38, etc. The adjective 1^3^ he never uses. — yp is frequent in Jeremiah, ii. 20; iii. 6, 9, 13, etc. 
 
 Ver. 9. — For the meaning of DOIDi see iii. 26. — The expression JTH -'^n, i» found in Jer. xiv. 18, but is' especially 
 
 /requent with Rzekiel, xxxj. 17,18; xxxii. 21-31. — tJ? relativum, see ii. 15.— ."J^p. The word is found in Jeremiah o:;;y in 
 
15t> 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 xlix. 4, and then in another sense. Here it must evidently denote the dissolTing of life, i. «., the lingering dying of tho 
 starving. The word does not, indeed, occur elsewhere in this sense, for everywhere else it stands for the virile flux or femalu 
 menses, or for confluence or abundant flowing together (OJI r\2f VIN, Ex. iii. 8, etc.), or for copious water-floods (Ps. 
 Ixxviii. 20; cv. 41 ; Is. xlviii. 21). But the connection absolutely requires us to take the idea of flowing, which the ■word 
 undoubtedly has, in this modification of it. Pareau, also, with propriety, calls attention to the closely related wordJXli 
 
 — T 
 
 tahescere (Jer. xxxi. 12, 25 , Ps. Ixxxviii. 10). He also shows that in the Latin, a similar affinity exists between tabescere and 
 Uquescrre. For as Seneua at one time says (Epist. 26) iitcummodum summum est minui et deperire et, ut propria dicam, 
 liquesi-ere. so he says annther time, (Midea, ver. 590), V» rivos nivibus snJufis anle jam /nrti, medinqu« ver^ tabuit TTspmus. 
 [See critical notes below.] — 0^"^p"T3- Jeremiah uses the word twice, xxxvii. 10 ; li. i, and both times the Part. Paul. — X'he 
 
 expression n"^ illS^Jil is found iu Deut. xxxii. 13; comp. Ez. xxxvi. 30; Is. xxvii. 6; .TiK^g. ix. 11. HJ^Jj^ does not oc- 
 
 - T .: T : 
 
 cur in Jeremiah, but ^^ty does, iv. 17 ; xviii. 14. ?r3, here, cannot possibly have the positive sense of giving out, failure, or 
 
 that of positive causality. It must rather be taken in its negative sense, away, far from, without. See ver. 18 ; and Jer. 
 xlviii. 45 ; Job xi. 15 ; xxi. 9. See my Gr., g 112, 5 d. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Vers. 7-11. The plan of tliis part [which may 
 be regarded a the antistrophe to vers. 1-6. — 
 W. H. H.] is exactly similar to that of vers. 1-6. 
 It begins with a description of what the Princes 
 cf Zion had to suffer. This description corres- 
 ponds evidently to what was said generally of the 
 sons of Zion, vers. 1, 2, of whom the Princes are 
 the flower. But vers. 7-9 form a climax to vers. 
 1, 2, which appears in the fact that what is said 
 of the Princes of Zion, in vers. 8, 9, surpasses 
 what is said of the sons of Zion in the last clause 
 of ver. 2. Ver. 10 corresponds in a similar way 
 with vers. 3-6, what was said there, being sur- 
 passed here. Ver. 11, finally, corresponds with 
 ver. 6; for like it, ver. 11 contains a definite, 
 comprehensive and inferential conclusion. 
 
 Ver. 7. Her Nazarites — her Princes. That 
 D''^'TJ here cannot denote the Nazarites is evi- 
 dent, not so much from the description which is 
 givtn of them, for that would be very suitable to a 
 Samson for instance, as from the fact that the 
 Nazarites were a mere fraction of the whole peo- 
 ple, too scattered and numerically insignificant 
 to be mentioned here with such particularity. 
 Rather as tliey [the Nazarites] were said to be 
 coronali, crowned ones, from their unshorn hair 
 
 [see Num. vi. 19, niJ~ilK in7J(^'7=^«* croivn is 
 shaven off of him; '\'}}}, the unshorn hair, ov crown, 
 Jer. vii. 29.— AV. H. H.], so the Poet here calls 
 the Princes crow7ied ones [see "^O, to encircle, 
 hence "^H, a crown, diadem or chaplet. — W. H. H.] 
 from the golden crown which they wore. It is 
 true this is a poetical expression, which is not of 
 frequent occurrence; for we can only compare 
 Gen. xlix. 20 (Deut. xxxiii. 16), where Joseph is 
 called Vnx TJJ, the crowned one among his brothers. 
 It is, besides, very apparent that the Poet was 
 required to select a subject, to which the brilliant 
 predicates, which he heaps up in ver. 7, would 
 be appropriate. [Gataker gives the same mean- 
 ing and derivation to the word, and refers to 
 Nah. iii. 17, 'ij''."}'^.'?, thy crowned ones, or honora- 
 ble ones. It seems more likely, however, that the 
 word designates Princes or nobles, not from any 
 allusion to their being crowned, which is not ob- 
 vious, but because they constituted a separate and 
 distiriguished class of persons, were set apart for 
 111 norahle offices, as the Nazarites were for 
 strictly religious services [non volo sed dignitale 
 
 separati; Nolditts, quoted by Gerlach). So 
 Calvin explains the word in Gen. xlix. 26, and 
 Blayney and Gerlach here. Boothroyd trans- 
 lates 7iobles. Noyes, princes. Henuehson re- 
 tains the word Nazarites. — W. H. H.] — Were 
 purer — more shining [glistening, gldnzender'\. The 
 word in Job xv. 15; xxv. 5, represents the 
 brightness of the heavens and the stars. — Than 
 snow. The comparison with the glistening 
 white snow is found also in Ps. li. 9 (7); Is. i. 
 18. — They -were w^hiter than milk. [Purer 
 t/ian snoiv, whiter than inilk, according to ordinary 
 Bible usage, are beautiful metaphors for inno- 
 cency of character and life. Here, however, they 
 refer entirely to physical appearance, the re- 
 splendent beauty of their complexion, as is plain 
 from what follows : not of their garments, as some 
 have imagined, but of their bodies, as is evident 
 from the antithesis in the next verse. — W. H. H.] 
 — They vrere more ruddy in body than 
 rubies (Rolblicher strahlten sie am Leibe als 
 Korallen), their body was of a more reddish hue than 
 corals. "Red on white is the normal color of ».he 
 human complexion, the prime-color of beauty. 
 Cant. V. 10 ; Lam. iv. 7," says Delitzsch, Psychol., 
 p. 75. [Calvin, understanding Nazarites as in- 
 tended, supposes that their red color was a mark 
 and evidence of God's favor as in the cases of the 
 Hebrew children recorded in Daniel. " We 
 know that the Nazarites abstained from wine and 
 strong drink: hence abstinence m'ght have 
 lessened somewhat of their ruddiness. For he 
 who is accustomed to drink wine, if he abstains 
 for a time, is apt to grow pale; he will then lose 
 almost all his color, at least he will not be so 
 ruddy; nor will there appear iu his face and in 
 his members so much vigor as when he took his 
 ordinary support. Jeremiah, in short, teaches 
 us that the blessing of God was conspicuous in 
 the Nazarites, for He wonderfully supported 
 them while they were for a time abstinents." 
 This necessity of appealing to a possible miracle 
 may itself create a doubt, if Nazarites are here 
 referred to at all. That in such a corrupt state 
 of society as existed, at that period of their his- 
 tory, among the Jews, there were many who as- 
 sumed the vows of the Nazarite, is doubtful. 
 There is no allusion to the existence even of 
 Nazarites among the people at this time, in either 
 the prophetical or historical books. But that 
 there was not only such a class, but that they 
 were so remarkable for their piety and so ac- 
 ceptable to God, that God gave them such evi- 
 dences of His favor as were bestowed on Daniel 
 
CHAP. IV. 7-9. 
 
 157 
 
 and his brethren, making them conspicuous 
 among men by their personal beauty, especially 
 by the ruddiness of their complexion, we cannot 
 believe. And it would be incredible and horri- 
 ble that upon that particular class the heaviest 
 judgments descended, as is related in the next 
 verse. If we infer from their personal beauty, 
 in ver. 7, that they were special favorites of 
 Heaven, we must conclude, from the transforma- 
 tion of their appearance into that of ugliness, in 
 ver. 8, that they were also special objects of Di- 
 vine wrath. The two things do not agree. This 
 alone proves that Nazarites are not intended. 
 The description of their personal appearance, 
 which could only apply to Nazarites, by some 
 such forced construction as requires Calvin to 
 invoke the aid of a miracle, is entirely appro- 
 priate to that class of the nobility represented by 
 the Princes, who lived delicately and luxuriously, 
 and whose faces, not embrowned by exposure to 
 the wejitlier, nor seamed and roughened by alife 
 of harlsliip, were flushed and shining from the 
 effects of high living, and whose persons beamed 
 and glistened, as it were, from the care bestowed 
 upon them, and the pains taken to beautify and 
 adorn themselves. Perhaps the idea conveyed 
 by the Hebrew verbs of ihe fflistenhiff quality of 
 their white and red coinplpxion, may be due to 
 the then prevailing use of unguents. — W. H. 
 H.] — Rubies, corals, D'J'JD. Concerning this 
 word, which occurs besides in Job xxviii. 18 ; 
 Prov. iii. 15; viii. 11 ; xx. 15 ; xxxi. 10, opinions 
 are much divided. The translations are entirely 
 at variance: Sept. }ii-&oi, Symm. to, TvepiliTiETrra, 
 Cliald. lapides pretiosi, Syr. sardinus, .Jerome, 
 ebur antiquum. Among the moderns, Bootius 
 (animadit ss., IV. 3), whom J. D. Michaelis, 
 GrESENiits. Maurer and Thenius [Henderson, 
 Notes, Uerlach, Fuerst] follow, maintains the 
 signification to be corals ; against which Bochart 
 (HiEROZ. P. ii., L. v.. Cap. 0, 7, ed., Rosenm., 
 Tom. iii., pag. 601 seqq.) contends for pearls. 
 His opinion is especially maintained by Pareau 
 (not on this passage, but in his remarks on Job 
 xxviii.) and supported with new arguments. 
 Leyrer also (in Herz. R.-Enc. XI., p. 399) is in- 
 clined to adopt this side. The decision is diffi- 
 cult. Corals agree best with the context, since 
 the existence of reddish pearls is too slightly 
 established, and the meaning oi glistening for the 
 Hebrew DIX is entirely hypothetical. — Their 
 
 polishing Tvas of sapphire, a sapphire was 
 their form. — Their polishing, their form, Ger. 
 Gestalt; Fr. tuilie; hut. forma, figuia [Eng. mien, 
 general appearance^. The word (mtJ, from "^IJ 
 iii. 54) occurs in this sense only here. In the 
 description of Ezekiel's temple it is u«ed of the 
 northern poi-ch, xli. 12-15; xlii. 1, 10, 13. [Blay- 
 ney, after Braunius (see Pictorial Bible), taking 
 the word from "^U to divide, or intersect, trans- 
 
 -T 
 
 lates, their veining was the sapphire; alluding to 
 the blue veins appearing through the white and 
 red complexions. So Boothroyd and Adam 
 Clarke. This would be either a mark of beauty, 
 or an intimation of the bloated condition of the 
 luxurious and pampered nobility. In either case, 
 the sense is good, and is recommended by the fact 
 that snow, milk and corals indicate color, and 
 therefore sapphire, too, would naturally suggest 
 
 the characteristic color of that gem. iTlTJ, how- 
 ever, would more likely indicate the cutting of a 
 gem, and hence its/o»-w, taille, and in case of the 
 sapphire, which is next in hardness to the 
 diamond, its brilliancy of appearance. Gerlach: 
 "The words are not to be understood of color 
 (as of the veins showing through, or of the gar- 
 ments, as Cant, xxviii. 18), but, on account of the 
 characteristic T\'^U, excisio, taille, of the perfect 
 shape, the consummate beauty of bodily form 
 (Kbrperbau). Sapphire was their form (Gestalt), 
 that is to say, so beautiful and without fault, as 
 if they were a polished image made out of pre- 
 cious stone." — W. H. H.] White as milk and 
 snow, red as corals, and shining as sapphire, is 
 the appearance of the nobles as here described. 
 This seems to constitute a climax to vers. 1, 2: 
 for the Poet evidently, in ver. 7, paints with 
 gayer and more variegated colors. 
 
 Ver. 8. In glaring contrast with ver. 7, he now 
 describes what has befallen the nobles in con- 
 sequence of the great catastrophe. — Their vis- 
 age — their appearance [so Blayney, Henderson, 
 Owen, Gerlach: their countenance, Notes: their 
 visage, Broughton, Boothroyd]. — Is [was, or 
 became. The verbs are all in the past tense. So 
 Gataker and Owen render them. The Prophet 
 is still looking back to what had taken place, 
 though now to a time posterior to that indicated 
 <n ver. 7- He is describing the change that took 
 place in the appearance of the nobles, while the 
 city was still standing, and they were seen in the 
 streets. — W. H. H] Blacker than a coal - 
 darker than blackness [so marg. E. V., Calvin, 
 Boothroyd, Gerlach, Wordsworth. Brough- 
 ton and NoYES, like the E. V. Vulg., Rashi, Kim- 
 CHi, black coals. Sept., soot. Owen suggests 
 darker than Sihor, or the river Nile, see Jer. ii. 
 18.] They are not \_werenot'] knoTvn — recog- 
 nized — in the streets. See ver. 5. The sense is, 
 in their houses they might perhaps be recognized, 
 but not on the streets — Their skin cleaveth 
 [_cle(iccd'\ to their bones. See Job xix. 20; 
 XXX. 30. — It is -withered, it is become like 
 a stick — it is [iV became~\ dry as icood. [The 
 English version — it is withered — arose from taking 
 the adjective dry, for the verb to dry. No other 
 English version has it so. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 9. This verse enters into close connection 
 with ver. 8. Here it is declared that the misera- 
 ble condition described in ver. 8, is the conse- 
 quence of starvation; and at the same time, the 
 reflection is made that death by hunger is inore 
 dreadful than death by the sword. — They that 
 be slain v^ith the sv7ord, are better than 
 they i;hat be slain with hunger; Happier 
 are they who arc slain by the sword, than they who 
 are by hunger slain \_Bappier tvere the sla.n by the 
 sword, than the slain by the famine. Translating 
 the words in the past time, removes them from 
 the category of a moral or psychological reflection, 
 and restores the harmony of the style as a poeti- 
 cal description of actual events. It reminds us, 
 too, .that the nobles suffered from the sword, as 
 well as by famine. They who died quickly by 
 means of the sword were more fortunate than 
 those who suffered a lingering death by starva- 
 tion. So in ver. 6, the Prophet regards, f^r 
 similar reasons, the destruction of Sodom as less. 
 
158 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 severe and terrible than that of Jerusalem. — 
 W. H. H.] — For these pine away — raarg., 
 flow out, — stricken through for want of the 
 
 fruits of the field — Who pme away pierced in the 
 heart for want of the fruits of the field. Tliis clause 
 declares two things in reference to those slain by 
 
 the sword (3|^n '''^vn), and those slain by hunger 
 Oi'1 '"^Sni, one in which they agree, and one in 
 which they differ. 1. That wherein they agree ; 
 they are both pierced through (C^j^^?). 2. 
 That wherein they differ; those that starve, me/i 
 away, that is to say, they die slowly, whilst with 
 the others, death is quickly over. 
 
 [The Versions and commentators accept gene- 
 rally the translation given above of the last clause 
 of this verse. Yet there are serious objections 
 to it, and cogent reasons for adopting a difi'erent 
 rendering. 1. It is taken for granted that the rela- 
 tive DHK' must refer to the last subject mentioned, 
 those slain or killed, by hunger. It is more gram- 
 matical to refer it to the principal subject of the 
 preceding clause, which is those slain by the sword, 
 regarding the sentence as only begun in the first 
 clause and finished in the second. The words 
 
 3J^T wSnO, than those killed by famine, could be 
 transposed to the end of the verse without chang- 
 ing the grammatical construction in the least, 
 (though it would mar the rhythm and the poeti- 
 cal paronomasia), and this shows that they are 
 entirely subordinate to the main idea. 2. A 
 meaning is forced upon the verb 3^T, of melting 
 or pining away, as descriptive of a slow death, 
 which it has in no other place in Scripture. In 
 tlie only place where it has been supposed to have 
 the meaning of dissolving, Jer. xlix. 4, Dr. Nae- 
 GKLSBACH himself says it has not that sense (see 
 gram, note above), and if it has, it would imply 
 rather a sudden, mysterious disappearance, than 
 a slow and prolonged dissolution. The aflBnity 
 between the Latin words tabescere and liquescere, 
 brought forward by Pareau, and confirmed by 
 a quotation from .Seneca, which has been re- 
 peated by nearly every commentator since, even 
 last of all by Gerlach, is of no force whatever; 
 not only because the usage of Latin thought and 
 expression is of no authority in Hebrew ; but 
 because liquescere, the fundamental idea of which 
 is to become liquid, to melt, has a natural affinity 
 to tabescere, to melt gradually, be dissolved n.nd hence, 
 metaphorically, to waste or pine away, while H^T, 
 the fundamental idea of which is \o flow out or 
 gush out, has no natural affinity to 3NT, even if 
 tlie fundamental idea of 3N1 is to melt, and cer- 
 tainly no affinity to 3XT in the only senses in 
 which it is used in the Hebrew Bible, of pining 
 away, or being distressed with sorrow or fear. On 
 the other hand, the only sense in which the word 
 31t is elsewhere used, as when it is applied to the 
 sudden and violent gushing out, or rapid overflow- 
 ing of water, see Ps. Ixxviii. 20 ; cv. 41 ; Is. xlviii. 
 21; Ex. iii. 8, admirably describes the death of 
 those whose Wves flowed atvug as the blood gushed 
 from their hearts, pierced with a sword. 3. The 
 fufuro form of the verb Or, is entirely ignored. 
 It may be difficidt, with our different modes of 
 thougut, always to detect the purport of a change 
 
 in the Hebrew tenses, but it is quite certain tha 
 these changes are never purposeless; and here, 
 where a future is suddenly thrust in Hiiunig pre- 
 terite tenses, it must have an import am bearing 
 upon the meaning intended. What the force of 
 the future here is, depends on the subject of the 
 relative and of the verb. If that sutject is those 
 slain by the famine, 3^"^ '77n, then the future 
 may have an optative sense; these tvould have 
 flowed out having been pierced, i. e., they would have 
 preferred to die by the sword. But if, as is more 
 likely, the subject is those slain by the sword, 
 J^ri'w/n, then the future has the sense in which 
 Jeremiah so often uses it, of the historical im- 
 perfect, and then, too, the relative DHii', has its 
 more proper sense of those who; Happier ivere 
 those slain by the sivord — those ivho gushed out having 
 /jeen pierced, i.e., who died instantly as the blood 
 gushed out of their hearts. 4. A metaphorical 
 meaning is thrust u^jon D'")plO=6ewi^ or having 
 been pierced, which the word can hardly bear, 
 namely, pierced with the sharp pains of hunger. The 
 word is only used of being pierced through bodily 
 with some sharp weapon, as a sword or spear. It 
 is never used metaphorically, not eveninZech. xii. 
 10; xiii. 3, which have been appealed to ; nor yet 
 in Prov. xii. 18, where the piercings of a sivord are 
 compared to wounds inflicted by a wicked tongue, 
 for even there the word derived from our verb is 
 used in the literal sense of bodily piercings, made 
 by a sword. The word might, it is true, in our 
 text, be an instance of bold, audacious metaphor. 
 But when there are so many other reasons for 
 taking it in its literal sense, we may spare our- 
 selves the task of justifying a metaphorical one. 
 5. The preposition jD, is taken in an unusual 
 sense. Calvin and others construe it blindly, — 
 pierced through by the fruits of the earth, and ex- 
 plain '-that all the productions of the earth took 
 vengeance on this wicked people, by refusing the 
 usual supply." This is too extraordinary a 
 personification of the fruits of the earth to be al- 
 lowable, and it is a strange thing to charge a 
 crime on an agent that has no existence. We 
 would rather adopt the opinion of Jarchi who 
 explained that their death was caused by the 
 weeds and roots with which, in their hunger they had 
 filled themselves, though it is something new to 
 call weeds and roots, fruits of the earth. The usual 
 explanation is, that they died /or want of the fruits 
 of the earth. It is doubtful if |p can be explained 
 in any such sense, as Dr. Naegelsbach seems to 
 concede, when he says it can only be taken in 
 the sense of away, far from, without. There is less 
 difficulty with this word, if we understand the 
 clause in the sense expressed by the Septuagint, 
 tTTopev^r/aav EKKEKEVTrjiievoi anb yEvvrjiidruv aypuv, 
 I key were driven away, having been pierced, from the 
 fruitful fields. So Chaldieus: '' Those fled away, 
 when they were pierced, from the products and fruits 
 of the field, i. e., they were full and satisfied, since 
 they were pierced when their bellies were full of 
 food;" and J. D. Michaelis, ''who, suddenly 
 pierced, forsook the rich fruits of the earth (on which 
 they dwelt)." This explanation really contains 
 the idea expressed by Bi.ayney's translation, 
 "tiiose, being thrust through, pass away before the 
 fruits of the field, i. e., they pass away at one 
 
CHAP. IV. 11. 
 
 15.\ 
 
 stroke, before the means of subsistence fail, and 
 so experience not the misery of wanting them." 
 Dathe supposes a direct comparison between the 
 suJdeuness of their death and the proverbial 
 withering of the grass. " Quicker yet than the 
 mown grass, they vanished who were pierced 
 with the sword." This idea of their dying be- 
 fore tiie famine came, throws additional light on 
 the use of the future tense in O.T', lit., they loere 
 gushing forth from the fruits of the field. The last 
 
 clause of the verse is a more specific statement 
 of what is said in the first clause. Happier were 
 those who fell by the sword, than those who 
 starved to death, especially those who being 
 pierced through, died while yet there were sup- 
 plies of food in the city. This is the idea I have 
 endeavored to express in the new translation. 
 Boothroyd's translation — For those pierced past 
 away, but these for want of the fruits of the field, 
 would require a new text. — W. H. H.] 
 
 IV. 10. 
 
 10 The hands of the pitiful women have sodden their own children : they were their 
 meat in the destruction of the daughter of my people. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 10.— 'jorr^ (spe EwALD, § 164, a ; Olsh., p. 412,/) is air. Aty. According to the sense it seems to denote, not the 
 external habits of lite, as T\3'\ and T\yi^ (Deut. xxviii. 56), but the inner habitus, softness and tenderness of feeling. The 
 etymology favors this, ser- D'OTTI and Din"!-— The verb 7tl?3 does not occur in Jeremiah. — "[')'' is found in Jeremiah once, 
 xxxi. 20.— nn?.. according to Fuerst, a secondary form of r\'t'\2, Ps. Ixix. 22 (Olsh., p. 417), is found only here. More 
 properly it should be taken, with Ewald (see § 165 c), Maurer, Olshausen, for the Inf. Piel, see fl w3'7, "IJt'^S DTI. Is. 
 Yi. l-"? ; Ps. xlix. 15.— The form 1:07 Jeremiah never uses.— *^1 "13t!/3- See ii. 11. 
 
 KXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 10. This verse exactly corresponds, with 
 respect to its subject, to vers. 3-5, and consti- 
 tutes in relation to those verses a climax. For 
 whilst vers. 3-5 speak of the pining away of the 
 children, here the yet more terrible fact is told 
 that mothers consumed tlieir own children. — 
 The hands of the pitiful vromen have 
 sodden their own children. The hands of 
 tender-hearted women cooked their oivn children. 
 
 They •were their meat in the destruction 
 
 ■ — thei/ were food for them in the ruin — of the 
 daughter of My people. The Poet would 
 say, that the complication of feelings and sensa- 
 tions, caused by their terrible calamity, hurried 
 away even tender-hearted women to the commis- 
 sion of this most horrible crime. See ii. 20. 
 [Henderson: "Compare 2 Kings vi. 28, 29; 
 Lev. xxvi. 29; Deut. xxviii. 56, 67. For a most 
 graphic description of such a horrible scene, see 
 JosEPHUs' account of the siege under Titus, 
 Bell. Jud. cap. X. 9."] 
 
 IV. 11. 
 
 11 The Lord hath accomplished his fury ; he hath poured out his fierce anger, and 
 hath kindled a fire in Ziou, and it hath devoured the foundations thereof. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 11.- n73. Jer. ix. 15 ; xiv. 12 ; xxvi. 8, dc. See ii. 22.— 'ir\nn, see ii. 4.— i3X 1^11, see i. 12.— HiT'. All exist- 
 ing forms of this root are Tery frequent with Jeremiah, ii, 15; ix. 9, 11 ; xvii. 27, etc. — HIQ^ Jeremiah never uses. See Ea. 
 XXX. 4; xiii. 14; Am. i. 4, 7, 10; Ps. cxxxvii. 7, e<c. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 11. This verse closes the second part of 
 the Poem, in a way entirely similar to that in 
 which ver. 6 closes the first part. In both there 
 is placed in our hand, as it were, a measuring 
 rule, that we may be able to measure the extent 
 and the significance of t\ie catastrophe which has 
 befallen Zion. Only in ver. 6 is indicated the 
 measure of the greatness of Zion's guilt, but 
 
 here the measure of the Divine wrath. [The 
 remarkable correspondence between vers. 1-6 
 and 7-11, which Dr. Naegelsbach has so skil- 
 fully developed, is argument enough for reject- 
 ing the arrangement of Gerlacii, who assigns 
 ver. 11 to the second general division of the 
 Poem.— W. H. H.].— The LORD hath ac- 
 complished his fury ; he hath poured out 
 his fierce anger, and hath kindled a fire 
 in Zion. and it hath devoured the founda- 
 tions thereof. Jehovah fulfitled His wrath, Ha 
 
160 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 poured out (die Glut seines Zornes) His hot anger, 
 and kindled afire in Zion that consumed her founda- 
 tions. [Gerlach remarks that the foundations 
 of the city were not literally destroyed, but that 
 this denotes in a general way that the city was 
 razed to the ground. This is explicitly said of 
 Zion, or the sacred part of the city, with special 
 reference to the Sanctuary, which was completely 
 destroyed. See Deut. xxsii. 22 ; Jer. xxi. 14 ; 
 
 vii. 20. We may regard this as a prophecy of a 
 future destruction that was to come on Zion, 
 when not one stone should be left upon another; 
 or, if not a prophecy, at least an instructive 
 commentary on the causes which led to that 
 catastrophe, and on the catastrophe itself as the 
 result of the wrath and fiery indignation of 
 Jehovah God, accomplishing the threatening of 
 His holy word.— W. H. H.] 
 
 PART II.— IV. 12-22. 
 Sect. III. Vees. 12-16. 
 
 h 
 
 Ver, 12. The kings of the earth believed not, 
 
 Nor all the inhabitants of the earth, 
 That an oppressor and enemy would come 
 Into Jerusalem's gates. 
 Ver. 13. On account of the sins of her Prophets, 
 The crimes of her Priests, 
 Who shed in the midst of her 
 Blood of the righteous. 
 ^ Ver. 14. They stumbled like blind men through the streets, 
 Defiled with blood 
 So that men could not 
 Touch their garments. 
 D Ver. 15. "Away ! unclean ! " men cried to them, " away ! away I touch not!" 
 When they fled away, they still stumbled. 
 Men said among the heathen, 
 " They shall not longer tarry." 
 5 Ver. 16. The anger of Jehovah scattered them ; 
 He will no longer look upon them. 
 Men showed no favor to priests, 
 
 They had no compassion for elders. 
 
 Sect. IV. Vers. 17-22. 
 
 ^ Ver. 17. As for us, our eyes failed, still looking 
 For our vain help : 
 On our watch-tower we watched 
 For a people that could not save. 
 ^f Ver. 18. They hunted our steps 
 
 That we could not go in our streets. 
 Our end drew near, our days were fulfilled. 
 Yea, our end was come I 
 15 Ver. 19. Swifter were our pursuers 
 
 Than the eagles of heaven : 
 On the mountains, they chased us ; 
 
 In the wilderness, they lay in wait for us. 
 n Ver. 20. The breath of our nostrils, the Anointed of Jehovah, 
 Was taken in their jjits, 
 Of whom Ave said. 
 
 Under his shadow will we live among the nations. 
 
 B' Ver. 21. Exult and be glad, daughter of Edom, 
 That dwellest in the land of Uz, 
 To thee, also, sliall the cup pass over, 
 
 Thou shalt be drunk and make thyself naked. 
 
CHAP. IV. 12-16. 161 
 
 n Ver. 22. Consumed is thy guilt, daughter of Zion, 
 No longer does He make thee captive. 
 He visits thy guilt, daughter of Edom, 
 He uncovers thy sins. 
 
 ANALYSIS. 
 
 Part third, vers. 12-16, treats of the causes of the terrible catastrophe. What even the heathen had not 
 deemed possible, ver. 12, had been brought about by the sins of the prophets andpriests, especially by their 
 blood-guiltiness, ver. 18, in consequence of which they had been proscribed by their oivn countrymen, and 
 not only so, but even in foreign countries they had been chased from place to place, and scattered and 
 treated in the worst manner, without respect to age or condition, vers. 14-16. Part fourth describes 
 the failure of the hope resting on Egyptian help, ver. 17 ; for the Chaldeans, in order to prevent the 
 flight of the king, kept the most careful watch, whereby this means of escape was prevented, ver. 18; 
 ivhen, nevertheless, the flight was at last attempted and frustrated by the rapid pursuit, the only hope 
 the fugitives still cherished, to be able to live among a foreign people, in the enjoyment of freedom, at 
 least, under the shadow of their oum king, was destroyed, vers. 19, 20. The last two verses, 21, 22 
 which constitute the conclusion of the whole, contain a short address to Edom, lohich, on account of its 
 malevolent joy at the downfall of Zion, is forewarned of a similar fate, whilst in the same connection, 
 the prospect is exhibited to Zion of the remission of her guilt and an end of her captivity. 
 
 Vers. 12-16. This third part contains an exposition of the causes of the punishment inflicted. What had 
 been regarded, even among the heathen, as impossible, namely, that the gates of Jerusalem should be 
 entered by force, ver. 12, this the godless priests and prophets, by their bloody cruelty, had rendered 
 possible, ver. 13. Thus they became an object of abhorrence to Israel and to the heathen, vers. 14, 
 15, so that, tolerated nowhere, they were scattered abroad and compelled to suffer the hardest of fates, 
 ver. 16. 
 
 IV. 12-16. 
 
 12 The kings of the earth, and all the inhabitants of the world, would not have 
 believed that the adversary and the enemy should have entered into the gates of 
 
 13 Jerusalem. For the sins of her prophets and the iniquities of her priests that have 
 
 14 shed the blood of the just in the midst of her. They have wandered as blind men 
 in the streets, they have polluted themselves with blood, so that men could not 
 
 15 touch their garments. They cried unto them, Depart ye ; it is unclean ; depart, 
 depart, touch not : when they fled away and wandered, they said among the heathen, 
 
 16 They shall no more sojourn there. The anger of the Lord hath divided them ; he 
 will no more regard them : they respected not the persons of the priests, they 
 favoured not the elders. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 12.— The Hiphil of jOX, once in Jeremiah, xii. 6.— V-IX-^Sd, Jer. xxv. 20.— [Si)1. The % omitted by K'ri, and 
 
 by some MSS. and Masoretic editions, and by Sept., is expressed in Syr., Chald. and Vulg. Blatnet]. — 73n is found in 
 
 Jeremiah only in the critically suspected passages x. 12 ; li. 15. The phrase 73n ''^VJ'' i3 is found verbatim Ps. xxxiii. 
 
 8, comp. xxiv. 1 ; xeviii. 7.— Jeremiah never uses *1V in the singular, seei. 5, 7, 10. iy is used in connection with ^'IX, 
 
 as here, in Esth. vii. 6.— □Sij/lT' '"'^V'^, Jer. i. 15 ; xvii. 19, 21, 27 ; xxii. 19. 
 TT : ■■^^-.[- 
 Ver. 13.— n3"lp3. See Jer. iv. 14; vi. 6 ; etc., and remarks on Lam. iii.45. — The expression, D''p'''^V D'l, occurs only 
 
 here: elsewhere it is always said 'pj m, e. p'. Deut. xxi. 8 ; 2 Kings xxiv. 4, or 'pjn m, Jer. xxii. 17, or D'PJ D'l. 
 
 I-T T |-T- - -I-: 
 
 Jer. xix. 4. 
 
 Ver. 14. — Jeremiah uses _yij once, xiv. 10. See Zeph. i. 17. — "l^^^, once in Jer., xxxi. 8. [Blaynet and Owen taks 
 0'^1^» as participle Pual of I^Jf to rouse or excite.}— r^VH^T^^- See vers. 5, 8.— D13 iSxjj- The words are taken ftom 
 Is. lix. 3. 7XJ, softened from 7j;i| (Lev. xxvi. 11, 15 ; Jer. xiv. 19). With reference to form, blended of Niphal and Pual, 
 see Olsh. g 275, Ewald, § 132, &., Deutzsch, Is. p. 5G6 [Green's Gr., exceedingly defiled, § 83, c. 2, J 122, 2]. ^XJ is found 
 in Jeremiah only in the sense of loosening, rede.eming ; see iii. 58. — The construction of 17JV with the finite verb is equi- 
 valent to the same witli the Infinitive, i. 14. See iii. 3, 5; Esth. viii. 6; my Crr. § 95, g. rem. j2^ is frequent in Jeremiah, 
 ■ee iii. 5 ; xviii. 6 ; xx. 7, etc. — J? J J in Jeremiah, iv. 10, 18 ; xii. 14, etc. — ty-IJ 7, Jer. x. 9. 
 
 Ver. 15. — T^D 'D Jeremiah, v. 23; xv. 5, etc. — ?*?3£D in the Singular, never in Jeremiah : he uses only once CXDCSn, 
 
 ■' T . .. . _ 
 
 xix. 13. [If he could use the plural only once, why not the shigular only once? — W. H. II.] — In the words mo !|T?D 
 
 ^yjn~7X the Poet seems to have in mind Is. Hi. 11, where the same words are used, only they are addressed, not to the 
 
 T • T 
 
 unclean, but to the clean.— V^J (kindred to %"|J, Q^J, but occurring in this signification only here) is not fovmd in Jere- 
 Biah. [Oerlach derives li'J from rii'J, which Jeremiah does use in its Aramaic form, and in same sense as here, Jer. 
 
 T TT 
 
 n 
 
162 
 
 THE LAxMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 slriii. 9. — W. H. H.]— ^WJ-Ql see !|>{1~DJ, Ps. xcv. 9. — Jeromiah uses ^^J frequently m chs. xlii.-xliv. (see xlii. 15, 17 
 
 ■'t - t - 
 
 22, etc.) — Hiphil fl'Dlil is fouiul in tin- P ophet only once, xxxi. 12, whilst it occurs in this chapter three times, vers. 
 
 1.5, 16, 22. 
 
 Ver. 16. — p7n (Hiphil occurs in Jeremiah only once in a passage critically lioubtful, xxxvii. 12) is to scatter, as Gen. 
 
 xlix. 7. With ri^gard to its singular number, see my Gr. g 105, 6. — •1"'DV, see ver. 15. — D'SH, see i. 11. — The phrase 
 
 D'J3 aU}, elsewhere very freqiicijtly (see Dout. x. 17 ; 2 Kings v. 1 ; Job xiii. 10; Ps. Ixxxii. 2; Prov. xviii. 5 ; Is. iii. 3; 
 
 • T T T 
 
 Mal. ii. 9; comp. Lam. v. 12), is not found in Jeremiah. — Of Tjn Jeremiah uses the Niphal only once, xxii. 23. 
 
 EXEGETTCAL AND CRITICAL, 
 
 Ver. 12 skilfully introduces the exposition of 
 the causes of what had happened, since the pre- 
 sumption, entertained even by the heathen, that 
 it was impossible for any human enemy to take 
 Jerusalem by force, was disproved (zur Folie- 
 gegeben wird) by the sad reality. — The kings 
 of the earth, and all the inhabitants of 
 the v7orld, would not have believed — had 
 not believed — that the adversary and the 
 enemy should have entered — that an op- 
 pressor and enemy would come — into the gates 
 of Jerusalem. It is clear that this verse con- 
 tains a hyperbole. For Jerusalem had been 
 captured more than once before the days of Ne- 
 buchadnezzar (see 1 Kings xiv. 26; 2 Kings xiv. 
 13, 14; 2 Chron. xxxiii. 11; 2 Kings xxiii. 33- 
 35). In spite of this fact, the opinion that it 
 could not be taken by force may have prevailed 
 among the heathen, but hardly to the extent 
 which the Poet here seems to ascribe to it. [Not 
 only was Jerusalem regarded as well-nigh im- 
 pregnable, because it was strongly fortitied by 
 nature and art ; but there was a prevailing senti- 
 ment among men that it was under the special 
 protection of the Almighty. The heathen idola- 
 ters knew to their cost that the God whom the 
 Jews worshipped was a God of great power. 
 They believed that the city of Jerusalem and its 
 Temple were under the special protection of that 
 God. The discomfiture of Sennac'ierib's army 
 in the days of Hezekiah at the very gates of Je- 
 rusalem, and the prolonged siege of the city by 
 the armies of Nebuchaflnezzar, were well calcu- 
 lated to deepen the impression that the God of 
 the Jews would not suffer the city to be taken. 
 To this sentiment the Prophet here refers. What 
 he says is pregnant and inferential. He assumes 
 that to be true, which even the heathen believed, 
 that the city cotild not be taken unless God gave 
 it up to destruction. God's giving it up to de- 
 struction implied that the city was guilty of great 
 and heinous sins; and without pausing to state 
 an inference so patent, the Prophet proceeds at 
 once to specify the particular sins which led to a 
 catastrophe that had astonished the kings of the 
 earth and all the inhabitants of the tcorld. He 
 thus condenses several thoughts into one ex- 
 pression; — what even heathen had not expected 
 had happened, and was evidence to all the world 
 of the horrible wickedness, which must have 
 provoked God to forsake His people! There is 
 no reason, therefore, for the suspicion that the 
 Prophet indulged in poetical exaggeration, even 
 if "Jerusalem had been cnpturcd more than 
 once bi'fme the days of Ni-buchadnezzar." In 
 point of tact, however, this last assertion may be 
 questioned. There is no clear evidence that Je- 
 
 rusalem had ever before fallen into actual posses- 
 sion of a heathen enemy. There is no evidence 
 at all that it had ever been taken by assault. On 
 the occasions referred to in 2 Chron. xxxiii. 11 
 and 2 Kings xxiii. 33-35, it does not appear that 
 the city of Jerusalem was actually occupied by 
 the enemy, or even visited by them, and there is 
 no intimation whatever of its being ait.icked and 
 taken by arms. From the account given in 2 
 Chron. xii. 4-9, we would infer that Rehoboam 
 bought peace by giving up the treasures of the 
 city: and that if he surrendered the city at all, 
 he did so without waiting for battle. Josephus 
 declares that Shishak took the city without fight- 
 ing (Ant. B. viii. ch. x. § 3) — and that this was 
 the only time it ever was taken before Nebuchad- 
 nezzar (Jewish War, B. vi. ch. x. § 1). But 
 there is no positive evidence that the Egyptians 
 actually took possession of the city. The account 
 of the invasion of Jmlah by the Philistines and 
 Arabians, 2 Chron. xxi. 16, 17, is very brief and 
 vague. If the king's house which they rifled, 
 was the palace in Jerusalem, it does not follow 
 that the whole city fell into their possession, or 
 that it was taken by assault. Joash, king of Is- 
 rael, 2 Chron. xxv. 21-24, undoubtedly took 
 possession of the city and dismantled and de- 
 stroyed its defences. But Joash was not a hea- 
 then king, neither did he take the city by assault. 
 Having already defeated the armies of Judah in 
 the field, he seems to have met with no resist- 
 ance at all before the walls of Jerusalem. — 
 W. H. II.] 
 
 Ver. 13. EwALD takes vers. 12, 13, as a ques- 
 tion. Would the kings of the earth .... believe, 
 that the enemy and oppressor had entered the 
 gates of Jeiusalem only on account of the sins 
 of her prophets .... who shed blood .... in 
 the midst of her ? The objections to this are: 
 
 1. The negative particle, Vh, ver. 12, is not the 
 same as the interrogative particle H. Should 
 
 we take it as intended for J<7n=is not, an af- 
 firmative answer would be expected. 2. Ewald 
 is obliged to insert, between vers. 12, 13, an 
 only which is not in the text, for he perceives 
 that the heathen might be shaken in the opinion 
 referred to, by a general apostacy of the people, 
 but not by the apostacy of particular individuals. 
 — Meier and Kalkak, on the other hand, con- 
 nect vers. 13, 14, and take the verb 1^'J=: they 
 irandered, in ver. 14, as predicate of the princi- 
 pal proposition. But in this case the people 
 must be regarded as the subject, which contra- 
 dicts the whole context. We must, therefore, 
 regard ver. 13, with Thenius and most others, 
 as an exclamation; or, as Maureb does, supply 
 
 a nxi nn'n^r^^is came to pasx, after ver. 13.— 
 For — on account of — the sins of her prO' 
 
CHAP. IV. 12-16. 
 
 16S 
 
 phets and [there is no conjunction in the 
 Heb.] the iniquities of her priests, that 
 have shed the blood of the just in the 
 midst of her. See Jer. xxvi. 7-24, where it is 
 manifest that the chief guilt of the blood of the 
 martyrs rested on the priests and prophets. 
 Compare Jer. vi. 13-15; xxiii. 11-15, with ii. 
 34; vii. 6; xix. 4; xxii. 3, 17; Ez. xxii. 25-29; 
 2 Chron. xxxvi. 14. [Gataker: "Not that the 
 people were not faulty, as well as either of these, 
 in those wicked pranks and practices that were 
 then committed; but that these were foremost 
 and forwardest ring-leaders and encouragers of 
 them unto those wicked courses, which they 
 ■should have reproved in them, and from which 
 they should have endeavored to restrain them." 
 Calvin: "He mentions one kind of sins, that 
 they shed the blood of the righteous in the midst of 
 Jerusalem. They had no doubt led the people 
 astray in other things, for they flattered their 
 vices and gave loose reins to licentiousness; but 
 the Prophet here fixed on one particular sin, the 
 most grievous; for they had not only, by their 
 errors and false doctrines and flatteries, led away 
 the people from the fear of God, but had also 
 obstinately defended their impiety, and by force 
 and cruelty repressed their faithful teachers, 
 and put to death the witnesses of God; for by 
 the righteous or just he no doubt means the pro- 
 phets. For what Jerome and others say, that 
 blood had been shed because false teachers draw 
 souls to perdition, is frivolous and wholly fo- 
 reign to what Jeremiah had in view; for the 
 word righteous cannot be applied to those misera- 
 ble men who were ensnared to their own ruin. 
 Then Jeremiah, after having denounced the sin 
 of the prophets and the iniquity of the priests, 
 mentions the savage cruelty which was as it 
 were the summit of all their vices."] 
 
 Ver. 14 They have -wandered as blind 
 men in the streets, they have polluted 
 themselves vrith blood. Theij staggered as 
 blind {men) through the streets, defiled ivith blood. 
 [Wandered. The verb is more frequently used 
 in the sense of staggering, reeling (so Gerlach), 
 or stumbling (Broughtdn, Noyes), than in any 
 other, and this sense is very appropriate to the 
 uncertain motion of biiiid men, who are not much 
 addicted to wandering about the streets. — W. H. 
 H.]. — As blind men. The idea cannot be 
 csedium perpetrandarum insatiabilicupiditate occiecati 
 [blinded by insatiable desire to commit mur- 
 ders], as RosENMUELLER would hiivc it; for they 
 have in fact already shed blood and therefore it is 
 added that they were defiled with blood. Rather, 
 they are, as it were, drunk with the blood they 
 have already shed, and in this drunkenness they 
 go along as if blind, not observing whom they 
 may chance to touch with their blood-stained 
 clothes. — So that men could not (marg. in 
 that they could not but) touch their garments 
 — when one could not [«'. e. lawfully] touch their 
 
 garments. — So that (Ewald, Thenius). N73 
 cannot be so rendered. It stands before the 
 whole negative sentence, as before a single word. 
 This pontence contains a statement on the sub- 
 ject of Levitical cleanness, with respect to the 
 uncleanness they contracted by the contamina- 
 tion referred to. Thus: They staggered ... in a 
 
 condition in which it was not lawful for any one to 
 touch them. [Gerlach, whose explanation agrees 
 with that just given, except that for no sufficient 
 reason he renders the verbs in the present tense, 
 has more accurately expressed the sense of the 
 original, than, perhaps, any other commentator. 
 "According to the whole drift of the chapter, 
 which describes the consequences of the judg- 
 ment with respect to particular classes and con- 
 ditions of the people, the following verses present 
 it description of the judgment inflicted on the 
 wicked Prophets and Priests, but not a mere 
 fragment of the history of the late siege. This 
 opinion is confirmed by the very first words of 
 ver. 14 {they stagger as if blind), v/hicXi denote else- 
 where, as a comparison with Deut. xxviii. 28, 29; 
 Jer. xxiii. 12; Isa. xxix. 9; lix. 10 shows, the 
 eff"ect of Divine punishment. * * The Prophets 
 and Priests should be the eyes of the people : 
 they have become blind and stagger about help- 
 lessly (rathlos und hiilflos) as blind men do; 
 thus has God's hand smitten them on account of 
 their sins. The evil marks of their sins they 
 carried about with them openly, so that all the 
 world could recognize them and avoid their touch, 
 lest they should become themselves unclean." — 
 Other translations and interpretations have been 
 given, all involving great difficulties. Blatney's 
 is unique. " They ran frantic through the streets, 
 they were stained tvith blood ; such as they could not 
 overpower, they touched their clothes. The meaning 
 is, that if they could no otherwise harm those 
 they met with in the streets, they defiled them 
 by touching their garments." This, besides the 
 impossible translations, is open to the objection 
 (that may be made to Rosenmueller's and 
 I3oothrotd's glosses, who represent the Prophets 
 and Priests, blinded by passion, seeking for 
 blood), namely, that the prophets and priests 
 shed the blood of the just, "not by raving 
 through the streets, sword in hand, but in a 
 more secret way, by instigating their agents" 
 'Noyes).— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver 15. They cried unto them. Depart 
 ye (inarg. ye polluted) ; it is unclean; depart, 
 depart, touch not: — Away! unclean one! tliey 
 cried to them, — away ! away ! toiich not! Who calls 
 I'^-ID [=depart ye, begone, or away.']? Not the 
 murderers, as is evident from the words they 
 cried [('. e. men cried'\ unto them [for the pronoun 
 must refer to the murderers. — W. H. H.]. The- 
 nius thinks, those who met together may have 
 
 called out thus to each other. But 107 (to them) 
 cannot mean one another. It might, indeed, be 
 taken in the sense of de iis \_concerning them'\, as 
 Pareau prefers, with an appeal to Ps. iii. 3; 
 Ixxxvii. 5, etc. But then the second half of the 
 verse, in which those murderers suddenly appear 
 as fugitives, is deprived of its appropriate expla- 
 nation. I take the words then as a call addressed 
 to the murderers. According to Lev. xiii. 4.'i, the 
 lepers were required to call out to those meeting 
 them, i<0£3, X0£3 ["unclean, unclean!"]. The 
 same cry is here addressed to those, who, with- 
 out reflecting on their uncleanness, stagger about 
 on the streets, as if blind, amongst those walking 
 there. [Wordsworth : " The Priests and Pro- 
 phets, who, in their spiritual pride, formerly 
 said to others, ' Come not near to me ; 1 an 
 
164 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 holier than thou ' (Is. Ixv. 5), shall be loathed 
 by others, as being polluted by blood, and men 
 shall cry to them tame! tame! [unclean! unclean!) 
 — words which the leper was obliged to cry out, 
 in order to keep others from him (Lev. xiii. 45). 
 The singular number [miclean) is here used, in 
 order to connect the words with that cry of the 
 leper"]. But this cry — 11-10 n^a^cay.' depart 
 ye! — is addressed to them most urgently, and 
 so I'epeatedly that they recognize themselves as 
 proscribed, and — are compelled to flee. The 
 threefold repetition of mo, away! seems to me 
 to indicate, that not merely immediately after 
 the murders, but persistently all contact with 
 them as with unclean persons was avoided. 
 Thus they were, as was said, proscribed. — 
 ■When they fled a-way and vyandered — 
 when they had fled away they contitiued fugitively 
 wandering about [for] they said among the 
 heathen, They shall no more sojourn there 
 — it was said among the heathen, They shall not 
 longer tarry. Now that they had fled, yet even 
 in a foreign land they found no rest. Thenius, 
 most unnecessarily and very awkwardly, sup- 
 poses a flight to the Chaldeans, who had sepa- 
 rated these outlaws without afi'ording them a 
 permanent place of abode (1'J) and carried them 
 away into captivity to various dilFerent places. 
 But those enemies of Jeremiah, who hated him 
 so bitterly and persecuted him, especially on 
 account of his constant admonition to submit 
 themselves to the Chaldeans (see Jer. xxxvii., 
 xxxviii.), certainly did not themselves go over to 
 the Chaldeans. Rather, it is only indicated here, 
 in a general way, that those outlaws might have 
 fled to heathen nations. But if they had, the 
 words 1J.*J Dl [also they wandered) show that their 
 Ji^J [wandering) did not end with their ]*1J [flight). 
 If they had fled, also they tvandered about, that is 
 to say, if they on their flight, after manifold 
 wanderings, thought that they had found at some 
 particular place a secure retreat, then men said 
 even there among the heathen, they shall not tarry 
 longer. They are then driven away even from 
 there. This so plainly reminds us of the restless 
 and fugitive wanderings of Cain, the first mur- 
 derer, that we take for granted that the Poet 
 had Gen. iv. 12-14 [-\T pi) in his mind. [If U'J 
 in ver. 14 means they staggered, as men smitten by 
 God with judicial blindness, it seems necessary 
 to give it the same meaning in ver. 15. The 
 sense is explained by the judicial use of the 
 word as expressive of God's judgments ; see ver. 
 14. Gerlach: " When they fl,ed away, they have 
 
 likewise staggered about, which, on account of tht 
 evident reference to 1J7J [they staggered) in ver 
 14, must mean that they staggered about as help- 
 lessly as they did before in the city ; and were 
 avoided in the same way. For if they would 
 escape the scorn of their own people by a hasty 
 departure from them, yet the nations, from whom 
 they sought a hospitable reception (I'j), would 
 refuse it to them. Men said. Tlicy shall no 
 longer remain as guests; see b' ii. xxviii, 65, 
 66: 'and among these nations shait liiou find 
 no ease, neither shall the sole of thy foot have 
 rest.'"— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 16. The anger (marg. face) of the 
 LORD hath divided them — Jehovah' k counte- 
 nance has scattered them. Thus the Poet describes 
 what is known to him of the actual condition of 
 those outlaws, in consequence of their banish- 
 ment. They could not even remain together, 
 but must be scattered. By the expression 
 the face of Jehovah, the scattering is traced 
 back to Jehovah as its cause, who had not lost 
 sight of them, but had directed upon them His 
 countenance inimically. See Ps. xxxiv. 17 (16). 
 [See also Lev. xvii. 10; Ps. xxi. 10 (9). In the 
 latter passage the words in the time of Thine 
 anger, are literally in the time of Thy face. There 
 may be an allusion here to Jer. xvi. 17, 18, 
 "For Mine eyes are upon all their ways: they 
 are not hid from My face, neither is their ini- 
 quity hid from Mine eyes. And I will first re- 
 compense their iniquity and their sin double." 
 When God forgives our sins, we may say, "Thou 
 hast cast all my sins behind Thy back," Is. 
 xxxviii. 17. But when He punishes them, we 
 are compelled to say, "We are consumed by 
 Thine anger, and by Thy wrath are we troubled. 
 Thou hast set our iniquities before Thee, our se- 
 cret sins in the light of Thy countenance." Ps. 
 xc. 7, 8. — W. H. H.] — He will no more re- 
 gard them. The verb is future, ^'pV. The 
 Poet predicts for the scattered ones, that there 
 will be no more favorable change of Jehovah's 
 mind towards them. — They respected not 
 the persons of the priests, they favoured 
 not the elders. The priests found not for- 
 bearance, the elders found no compassion [or, we 
 may translate more literally as E. V. under- 
 standing that the subject of the verbs are the 
 heathen, or men generally ; and the wicked 
 murderous priests and elders are the objects of 
 the verbs. God has irretrievably cast them 
 away; and men scorn and injure them. — 
 W. H. H.] Men deal with them without regard 
 to their condition or age. 
 
 IV. 17-20. 
 
 17 As for us, our eyes as yet failed for our vain help : in our watching we have 
 
 18 watched for a nation that could not save us. They hunt our steps, that we cannot 
 
 19 go in our streets: our end is near, our days are fulfilled ; for our end is come. Our 
 persecutor.-^ are swifter than the eagles of the heaven : they pursued us upon the 
 
 20 niouutaiiis, they laid wait for us in the wilderness. The breath of our nostrils, the 
 anointed of the Lord, was taken in their pits, of whom we said, Under his shadow 
 we shall live amontr the heathen. 
 
CHAP. IV. 17-20. - 1G5 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 17. — ^y^1y [K'rl, Ijni^]. The form is a monstrosity. For, 1. -y\^ never stands in the plural with suffixes. 2. 
 
 If we suppose that the suffix is joined to Dm^, then it should be written ri'll^ orinm^'- 3- The suffix form nj'- 
 
 is entirely abnormal. The only possible analogy would be rUTTi^'U, Ez. i. 11, according to which nj'lil' would be con- 
 
 T|v ■■ • : T ■■ " 
 
 tracted from rUTTniy. But on what does the plural suffix di-pend? To meet this difficulty the Masorites read IJ'Tiy. 
 
 T|V ■■ 
 
 [So Calvin, while we were yet standing: Blatney, Henderson, Owen, while yet or stiU we existed. Blatnet conjectures thai 
 the final H " is a corruption, not of a single 1, but of two 11, the latter of which ought to be prefixed to n J' /DH, where by 
 its conversive force, it not only clears the passage from all difficulty, but brings the text into a perfect agreement with the 
 LXX., Syr. and Vulg. Versions."] But here also the difficulty remains that the suffix would be joined to D"ni>'- Ols- 
 H^USEN Q 222, g.) on this account assumes that ^J'llJ? stands for ^JHlJ?, and that the K'tib is the result of an error in 
 writing. The latter seems to me also probable : only I believe that the feminine ending of the suffix is correct, and that 
 the ' before HJ was occasioned by the immediately following ny/DP- The word then had the sound originally of 
 71]n'iy (1 Kings i. 22). Him 17. as a proposition, with a predicate to be supplied, is it is true also abnormal, even if only 
 
 TV T V 
 
 the idea of being is supplied. Yet the sense is pertinent. She, that is to say Jerusalem, still stood. We may refer for the 
 grammatical construction to Jer. xl. 3. [This is Rosenmueller's explanation. But there is no particular reference to the 
 city in the whole preceding part of the Song ; and neither the city nor Zion is in the mind of the writer or the reader. If 
 then we adopt the reading njmyt the explanation of Thenids is certainly to be preferred, " Whilst this was or happened, 
 — namely, the incident just related with reference to the fugitives." But Gerlach is of the opinion that nj'- can be taken 
 as suff. Zpers.fem.plur. referring to tlie eyes. He refers to an analogous case in Ps. Ixxiii. 5, 10^- in ID'J'X, and explains 
 its occurrence here as influenced by sympathy with n^'Son and a desire to distinguish the suffix from the singular form 
 in ^5^il^ l Kings, i. 22. Then the translation is Yet our eyes wasted themselves in looking for our help. So Brohghton, 
 Hven i/'et our eyes are spent at our vain help, and Notes, Still did our eyes fail, looking for help in vain. The same sense may 
 be retained if we adopt the K'ri, adhuc nos (sc. conficimur) vel poiius oculi nostri conficiunter (Gerlach). Yet if the K'ri is 
 adopted, the lit. translation would be, as yet we, see Josh. xiv. 11. The fact that this is the initial word, gives to it an em- 
 phasis, both accurately and felicitously expressed in the English Version, As for us still our eyes failed looking for our vain 
 
 help.—W. H. H.]— 1J'J"'y nrSuri- see ii. 11.— HITV, in Jer. xxxvii. 7. for the construction of SdH IJfllJJ', see my 
 
 •■ •• T V : • T :■.■ :■ t • t: v 
 
 Gr. (io, 4, g. [The possessive pronoun, as a suffix, may come between a noun and the word qualifying it, and then the pro- 
 noun and qualifying word are to be expressed together : our help of ranity=our vain lielp. See Naeoels. Gr. — W. H. H.] — 
 S^n in Jer. xvi. 19; x. 3, 8 ; ii. 5, etc.—XVB'^ is an-. Aey. r\ii^, in Jer. vi. 17; xlviii. 19.— iT^ty'in, Jer. xi. 12; xiv. 9; 
 xlii. 11, etc. See also 7'y V XI 7, Jer. ii. 11. Yet Is. xiv. 20 seems to have been especially in the Poet's mind, where it is 
 •aid )}-'pV xS ^^r^^.- 
 
 Ter. 18. — Concerning "Vi^, see iii. 52. With reference to the signification insidiare, lying-in-wait for, see Mic. vii. 2 ; 
 Prov. vi. 26, and the nearly related 711^, 1 Sam. xxiv. 12. The reading ny, which some Codices have after the analogy 
 
 TT T 
 
 of Prov. iv. 12; Job xviii. 7, gives a less suitable sense. [The change of ^y into ^1V may have been suggested by the 
 
 T T 
 
 difficulty of inten»roting the former in accordance with its proper signification of seizing, catching or obtaining by hunting. 
 
 See Notes below.— W. II. H.] — nj7i', in Jeremiah once, x. 23. [Blatnet : " The LXX. instead of 1J''nj;]; seem to have read 
 
 lyi'V^' ""'' '"''^ ones." Here again is a change of the text suggested, doubtless, by the difficulty of hunting (or seizing 
 
 upmi asprey) the footsteps.— W. H. H.]— For the construction of ni37D see Hl^^jnO, ver.9.— 3n^, Jer. v.l; xlviii. 38, 
 
 etc. — 31p, see iii. 57. — ^J^D' W7D. The expression is elsewhere used of filling up the measure of the days of one's life, 
 
 -It -t : It 
 
 see J( r. xxv. 34 ; 1 Chron. xvii. 11.— Vp X3, Jer. Ii. 3, comp. Am. viii. 2 ; Ez. vii. 2-6. 
 
 Ver. 19.— cbp- The Prophet uses the adjective "JH in ii. 23; iii. 9; xlvi. 6. -lyDnh, see i. 3.— The phrase ^'^^^ifi 
 
 D'DK? occurs only here: yet see Prov. xxiii. 5 ; xxx. 19.— p 7'! is properly speaking to glow with heat, to bum, Ps. vii. 14; 
 
 •-T I -T 
 
 Ez. xxiv. 10. Then it is used in the transferred sense of hot pursuit, and indeed at first with 'TnX (as it were, burning 
 
 after nnr) Gen. xxxi. 36; 1 Sam. xvii. .55. Only in this place is the word construed directly as transitive with the Ace. of 
 
 the object. Jeremiah never iiv.-iils himself of the word.— 1310, very frequent in Jer., ii. 2, 6 ; iii. 2, ete.— 31X, see iii. 10. 
 
 T : ■ - T 
 
 Ver. 20. — The expression ^ ytJX nil is not found in Jeremiah ; but, founded on Gen. vii. 27, in Ex. xv. 8 ; Ps. xviii. 
 
 6 (2 Sam. xxil. 16); Job iv. 9; comp. Cant. vii. 9. — '•'''' P'lyD is not found in Jeremiah. See 1 Sam. xxiv. 6, 7, 11; xxvi. 9, 
 
 11,16,23; 2 Sam. i. 14, 16 ; xlx. 22; xxiii. 1.— 13^, Jeremiah uses frequently. See ii. 56; xxxviii. 28; xlviii. 1, etc. — 
 
 n'riiy, (comp. Jl^nU', Prov. xxiii. 10) is found, besides here, only in Ps. cvii. 2,0.-^)1, Jer. vi. 4; xlviiL 45. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL, 
 
 Vers. 17-20. With few but telling strokes the 
 Prophet here sketches a picture of the events 
 which constitute the last stadium of the great 
 catastrophe, ending with the imprisonment of 
 the king. He describes how they in Jerusalem 
 had placed their last hope on Egyptian help, 
 
 which was not realized, ver. 17. Then, omitting 
 all that had reference to the capture of the city 
 itself, he passes over to the ilight of the king, 
 which he describes so graphically, that we are 
 obliged to regard him as a participator in the 
 events he narrates. He describes how they were 
 so closely watched, that soon all hope of escape 
 forsook them, ver. 18. With extraordinary ce- 
 lerity they were pursued, ver. 19, and the king 
 
IGJ 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 was imprisoned. With that, their last hope, the 
 hope that they might live under his shadow, in 
 the enjoyment at least of liberty, even if among 
 foreign people, was frustrated, ver. 20. 
 
 Ver. 17. As for us, our eyes yet failed 
 for our vain help. Yet stood she! Our ei/es 
 longed after our vain help. She, that is to say Je- 
 rusalem, still stood, exclaims the Poet with em- 
 phasis, and thus transports us into the historical 
 eveui of which he treats. [For the reasons 
 stated above in Textual and Grammatical Notes, 
 the correct translation seems to be. Still did our 
 eyes fail looking for our vain help. Literally, 
 Still our eyes exhausted or spent themselves (look- 
 ing) /or owr vain help. — W. H. H.] The Poet de- 
 scribes here the yearning long-cherished hope 
 of Egyptian help. The retreat of the Chaldean 
 army (Jer. xxxvii. 5) had greatly strengthened 
 liiat hope. But it proved delusive. Instead of 
 the Egyptian army, the Chaldeans were soon 
 seen again approaching the city (Jer. xxxvii. 8; 
 xxxiv. 22). [Our vain help. Calvin: "There 
 is an implied contrast between empty and fal- 
 lacious help and the help of God, which the peo- 
 ple rejected when they preferred the Egyptians."] 
 — In our watching — on our watch-toiver [.?o 
 Bl.wney, Boothroyi), Henderson, Notes, Ger- 
 LACH, D.vviDsoN Lex., Ft'erst Lex.'] — We have 
 ■wratched for a nation that could not save 
 us — we watched for a people that helps not [or, 
 will not help (Gerlach), or, may not, i. e. cannot 
 save.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Yer. 18. They hunt our steps, that we 
 cannot go in our streets — They watched our 
 steps that loe could not go on our streets. Ewald 
 understands the first half of the verse as refer- 
 ring to an edict of the Egyptian king, which 
 prohibited the refugees who were in Egypt from 
 carrying on traffic of any kind with Palestine. 
 This was considered, and not without reason, 
 the harshest measure that could be imposed upon 
 them. But we have not the least knowledge 
 of any kind of trade with the markets of Palestine 
 at the time of its depopulation, or of any prohi- 
 bition of visiting those markets. Besides, it is 
 not at all probable that the Jews, who had fled 
 to Egypt, impelled by fear of the Chaldeans, 
 would have had any desire to go back again 
 within the reach of the power of the Chaldeans. 
 Then, too, this thought in this connection seems 
 an excessively awkward varepov izporepov [put- 
 ting last first]. Thenics and Vaihinger 
 [Blayney, also] understand these words of the 
 besieging towers, whence the streets were bom- 
 barded and so walking in them was prevented. 
 I will not deny that from these towers (see re- 
 marks on Jer. lii. 4, 5) the city might be watched. 
 But to refer the words that loe could not walk in 
 the streets to the bombardment of the streets, 
 seems to me a singular notion. We are not to 
 suppose that the besieging machines of the an- 
 cients carried cannon. [Remembering how nar- 
 row the streets of oriental cities are and how 
 protected, often, by the buildings projecting over 
 them, it is obvious that no besieging towers 
 could so command the streets as to expose the 
 citizens to the aim of the enemies' weapons. — 
 W. H. H.] We read in Jer. lii. 7, 8, "And all 
 the men of war fled, by the way of the gate be- 
 tween I he two walls, which was by the king's 
 
 garden: (now the Chaldeans were by the city 
 round about;) and they went by the way of the 
 plain. But the army of the Chaldeans pursued 
 after the king, and overtook Zedekiah in the 
 plains of Jericho ; and all his army was 
 scattered from him." See 2 Kings xxv. 4, 5. 
 From this description it appears, 1st. That Zede- 
 kiah with his men of war endeavored to escape 
 secretly, and did so escape by a flight at night 
 from a gate situated on the west side of the city. 
 2d. That the Chaldeans sought to prevent liis es- 
 cape. This is evident from their surrounding the 
 city, as well as from the secret flight and imme- 
 diate pursuit. It is also obvious, a priori, that 
 Nebuchadnezzar was near at hand for the very 
 purpose of getting possession of the person of the 
 king. Now does not our passage answer exactly 
 to all this? All the steps of the beleaguered 
 citizens were observed, so that they could not go 
 upon their streets unhindered. I do not under- 
 stand T\^^^\'^^^streets of the country roads. But I 
 believe that the passages leading out of the city, 
 as for example the way between the walls, can be 
 
 classed with the nOTTl^siree/s. [The verb ren- 
 dered hunt, n^i', means (see remarks oniii. 52), not 
 merely to hunt, but to take by hunting, not merely 
 to lay snai'cs (Notes), but to ensnare or take in snares. 
 It clearly has this meaning, it seems to me. both in 
 Mic. vii. 2 and Prov. vi. 26. The word rendered 
 
 streets, niDrTl, means the streets of a city, as is 
 plainly evident here from the expression our 
 streets. ^J'^^niS, in our own streets, can only mean 
 the streets of our city, and that no out of the way 
 passages between the walls, but streets that were 
 common property, and which they were accus- 
 tomed to wallc in. Our text then can only mean 
 that those who appeared on the streets were at 
 ouce arrested. Zedekiah and his army were not 
 captured in the streets, but far away from the city. 
 It is obvious, therefore, that neither this verse, 
 nor the following one, refers particularly to the 
 flight and capture of Zedekiah and his army. It 
 relates to a time posterior to that event. The 
 city was already in possession of the Chaldeans: 
 the enemy had entered into the gates of Jerusalem 
 (ver. 12), which did not occur till one month 
 after Zedekiah's capture. The Prophet having 
 announced in ver. 11, that the Divine wrath was 
 accomplished, and Zion consumed with fire to 
 \]iQ\evy foundationsthereof, goes back in vers. 12- 
 16, to attribute this event to the sins of the pro- 
 phets and priests, and to show how they were 
 abhorred and punished, — then in ver. 17, he tells 
 us, how those that were left in the city continued 
 to the very last to hope for Egyptian aid, — in ver. 
 18, that they could not escape from the city, for 
 they were captured the moment they appeared in 
 the streets, — in ver. 19, that those who did man- 
 age to escape from the city, were pursued and 
 captured, whether they fled to the mountains or 
 the desert, — and ver. 20, declaring that their 
 king was already a prisoner, recognizes the fact 
 that tlie kingdom is destroyed and their inde- 
 pendent nationality is at an end. With all this 
 the last half of ver. 18 harmonizes; when they 
 found that the Egyptians did not come, and that 
 they were wholly in tlie power of the Chaldeans, 
 
CHAP. IV. 17-20. 
 
 167 
 
 then it was evident that their end was near, their 
 days fulfilled, — yea, their end had actually come I 
 We translate the first half of the verse, therefore, 
 They hunted our steps, or they ensnared our steps, 
 that is, they were on the watch for us and caught 
 us as a wily trapper watching the steps of his 
 game, so that we could not go in our streets. — W. H. 
 H.] — Our end is near, our days are ful- 
 filled; for our end is come. \_Our end ap- 
 proached, our days were fulfilled, for (or yea, ja, 
 Gerlach) our end arrived, or was actually come. 
 There is no change of tense from the first half of 
 the verse. — W. H. H.] These are the ipsissima 
 verba of the fugitives, which describe most gra- 
 phically how they felt, when they observed that 
 their flight was discovered. Since many sur- 
 vived those days, among others the king and the 
 Poet himself, it is evident that these words are 
 to be interpreted, not of what happened, but of 
 what they feared would happen. Besides, the 
 second half of the verse, composed of two mem- 
 bers, is climacteric ; for in the first, the end is 
 indicated only as near, but in the second as come, 
 and therefore the measure of life as fulfilled. 
 [These words were not the words of "fugitives," 
 for reasons given above. They may have been 
 the words of the would-be fugitives, those who 
 would have escaped from the city if they had not 
 been arrested in the streets of the city. It is 
 better, however, to regard them as the words of 
 the Prophet. The Egyptians did not come to the 
 rescue. Escape from the city was impossible. 
 Then, says he, our end approached, the days of our 
 national existence were accomplished, yea our end 
 actually arrived, when the city was consumed with 
 fire, and the people transported to Babjdon. — 
 W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 19. Our persecutors are — our pursuers 
 vere — s'wifter than the eagles of the heaven. 
 The image of the eagles is taken from Jer. iv. 
 13, where it is said of the enemy from the north 
 "his horses are swifter than eagles." See 2 Sam. 
 i. 23. Their apprehension proves to be well 
 founded. The pursuit was begun instantly and 
 with the greatest energy. — They pursued us 
 upon the mountains, they laid -wait for us 
 in the wilderness. On the moujitains they 
 chased us, in the wilder7iess they were on the watch 
 for us [Gerlach: laid snares for ms.] It is to be 
 observed that the way from Jerusalem to Jeri- 
 cho, at first over heights (beginning with the 
 Mount of Olives) leads directly down into the 
 plain of the Ghor. See the full description of 
 this road in Rittek's Geography, xv. 1, pp. 485 
 If. Let the suffixes of the first person be care- 
 fully observed in this whole narration of the 
 flight of the king, vers. 18-20. Would not one, 
 who knew of the facts only by hear-say, have 
 used the third person ?* And does not the first 
 person show, as also the animated clearly defined 
 particulars do, that he himself had participated 
 in the flight from that fierce pursuit? [Granting 
 that the flight and pursuit of the king are here in- 
 tended, there is surely nothing in the description 
 that necessarily implies the presence of the au- 
 thor with the king. But we have seen above 
 that this verse cannot relate to the flight and cap- 
 
 * [Is this question well put by one who regards the third 
 Song as the composition of another than Jeremiah himself? 
 — W. H. H.J 
 
 tare of the king. The Prophet is simply relating 
 the fate of the people and confirming his declara- 
 tion that their end, as a people, a nation, had come, 
 ver. 18. The Egyptians did not arrive for their 
 relief. Those who ventured into the streets were 
 seized and made prisoners. Those who managed 
 to escape were hotly pursued or fell into am- 
 bushes carefully prepared in view of their flight. 
 They were now hopeless and helpless. And to 
 crown all, their king was a prisoner, ver. 20, and 
 even if they could escape from their pursuers, 
 they could not rally around his sacred person 
 and preserve their independent sovereignty in 
 some foreign land. Thus in very truth their end 
 had come, which is the point the Prophet has in 
 his mind.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 20. The breath of our nostrils. [Owen: 
 "A kingdom cannot exist without a king. Hence 
 the king may be said to be the breath or the 
 life of the body politic."] — the anointed of the 
 LORD — of Jehovah — was taken in their pits 
 — -[Calvin: in their snares. Brougiiton: wascaught 
 in their trap.l — Of whom ■we said, under his 
 shadow — [or, according to Owkn and Noyes, 
 under whose shadow, ive said,^ — see Is. xxx. 2, 3; 
 IIos. xiv. 8 (7) ; Ez. xxxi. 17. — We shall live 
 among the heathen — yhe nations, Calvin, 
 Broughton, Boothroyd, Owen, Noyes, Ger- 
 lach. Blayney: "To live among the nations, 
 probably means to exist in a national capacity, 
 or as one among them."] It is not the purpose 
 of the Poet to sound the praises of the king. The 
 literal meaning of the words and the connection 
 utterly refute the idea, adopted by the Chaldaic, 
 Raschi and many modern commentators, that 
 this refers to the pious Josiah, whom Jeremiah, 
 according to 2 Chron. xxxv. 25, glorified in a 
 song of lamentation. The King here meant can 
 only be Zedekiah. He was a weak, but a good- 
 natured king. He resembled Louis XVI. of 
 France. Like him he may also have been well- 
 beloved. But the principal point was that he was 
 king, and especially the theocratic king. Seneca 
 says (de Clemenlia, i. 4, according to a quotation 
 of Pareau's), Ille (princeps) est spiritus vitalis, 
 quern hsec tot millia [civium) trahunt [he (the 
 sovereign) is the vital breath, which so many 
 thousands (of citizens) inhale]. Much more 
 the theocratic king, the Lord's anointed, the 
 bearer of the promises (2 Sam. vii.) was a living 
 pledge of the continuance and prosperity of the 
 people. See Ps. xxviii., especially ver. 8, and 
 Uelitzsch on that place. We can see, besides, 
 from the words of whom we said, etc., what plan 
 with reference to the future was entertained by 
 the fugitive Jews. They hoped to escape to a 
 friendly heathen nation, and there gathering 
 around their king as their shield and security of 
 a better future, pass their days at least in free- 
 dom. [Wordsworth: "It has been objected by 
 some, that the Lamentations could not have been 
 written by Jeremiah on the occasion of the de- 
 struction of Jerusalem, because such words as 
 these, could not be applied to sucli a vicious kiu^ 
 as Zedekiah. But such an objection as this be- 
 trays an ignorance of the nature of true loyalty, 
 as taught by Almighty God in the Old Testament, 
 as well as in the New. He teaches us to dis- 
 tinguisii the person of the sovereign from his 
 office, and to venerate his authority as from God 
 
108 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 (Rom. xiii. 1-7), whatever may be his personal 
 character. Even Saul was 'the Lord's Anointed,' 
 and was revered and bewailed as such by David. 
 See on 1 Sam. xxvi. 8, 11, 16, 23; 2 Sam. i. 14, 
 16. And our blessed Lord and His Apostles 
 teach us to obey a civil ruler, as God's deputy 
 and vicegerent, in all things not unlawful, al- 1 
 though that ruler may bo a Tiberius (see on 
 Matt. xxii. 21) or a Nero (see on Rom. xiii. 1- 
 7: Titus iii. 1; 1 Pet. ii. 13)." Calvin: "God 
 made David king, and also his posterity, for this 
 end. that the life of the people might, in a man- 
 ner, reside in him. As far then as David was the 
 head of the people, and so constituted by God, 
 he was even their life. The same was the case 
 with all his posterity as long as the succession 
 
 continued But we must observe that 
 
 these high terms in which the posterity of David 
 were spoken of, properly belong to Christ only; 
 for David was not the life of the people, except 
 as he was the type of Christ and represented 
 His person. Then what is said was not really 
 found, in its fullest significance, in the posterity 
 
 of David, but only typically. Hence the truth, 
 the reality, is to be sought in no other but in 
 Christ. And we hence learn that the Church 
 is dead, and is like a maimed body, when sepa- 
 rated from its Head. ... In short, Jeremiah 
 means that the favor of God was, as it were, ex- 
 tinguished when the king was taken away, be- 
 cause the happiness of the people depended on 
 the king, and the royal dignity was as it were 
 a sure pledge of the grace and favor of God ; 
 hence the blessing of God ceased, when the king 
 was taken away from the Jews. . . . We shall live, 
 they said, even among the nations under the shadow 
 of our king ; that is, 'Though we may be driven 
 to foreign nations, yet the king will be able to 
 gather us, and his shadow will extend far and 
 wide to keep us safe.' So the Jews believed, but 
 falsely, because by their defection they had cast 
 away the yoke of Christ and of God, as it is said 
 in Ps. ii. 3. As then they had shaken oflF the 
 heavenly yoke, they in vain trusted in the shadow 
 of an earthly king, and were wholly unworthj 
 of the guardianship and protection of God."] 
 
 IV. 21, 22. 
 
 21 Rejoice and be glad, O daughter of Edom, that dwellest in the land of Uz : the 
 cup also shall pass through unto thee; thou shalt be drunken, and shalt make thy- 
 
 22 self naked. The punishment of thine iniquity is accomplished, O daughter of 
 Zion ; he will no more carry thee away into captivity : he will visit thine iniquity, 
 O daughter of Edom ; he will discover thy sins. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 21.— ■'f\3U;V. For the form see Jer. x. 17. [May we recognize a peculiarity of Jeremiah in this form ?— W. H. H.] 
 — ''t!?''B', see i. 21.— 13, Jer. XXV. 15, 17, 28; xlix. 12; li.7, ete. The expression O'l^jt^H is peculiar to this place.— 
 'y^'^, inebriari, Jer. xxv. 27 ; xlviii. 26 ; Ii. 7, 39, 57.— Hithp. of HIV only here. Jeremiah uses the verb in no form. 
 
 -T T T 
 
 Perhaps there lies in nj?nn an allusion [ironical?] to that n;^, ^"1J7 of the Edomites, Ps. cxxxvii. 7. 
 
 Ver. 22.— The perfects'in this verse indicate, that the Poet transfer-s himself into the future, in such a manner that he 
 sees what is yet future, as if it were actually transpiring before him.— j'l^j;, see ver. C— Dp, frequent with Jeremiah, i. 3 ; 
 vi. 29 ; xxiv. 10, e«c. The phrase j'l;; DH occurs only here.— Jeremiah uses Hiphil of S JH very often, xx. 4 ; xxii. 12, etc.: 
 also the Piel, see ii. 14, where the construction with ^_J^ also occurs.— np3, Jer. v. 9, 29; xxv. 12, etc. The phrase lp3 
 rij? is a characteristic of the Pentateuch, Ex. xx. 5 ; xxxiv. 7 ; Lev. xviii. 25 ; Num. xiv. 18 ; Deut. v. 9 : yet it is also found 
 in Jeremiah, xxv. 12 ; xxxvi. 31. 
 
 that time, or at an earlier period, or whether it 
 merely refers to such an extension in a general 
 way, is very questionable. Ewald (on this text 
 and Gesch. d. B. Isrl. IV. S. 9) is of the opinion, 
 that Nebuchadnezzar had extended the dominion 
 of the Edomites " in the land of Uz far to the 
 north-east." But this position of the land of Uz 
 [north-east of Idumea] is very problematical. 
 See remarks on Jer. xxv. 20. At all events, the 
 words are most easily explained if the dwelling 
 in the land of Uz is regarded as an evidence of 
 success and a cause for rejoicing on the part of 
 Edom. The historical accounts are too sparse to 
 enable us to ascertain anything on this subject 
 with certainty. See Carl von Raumer, Eastern 
 Palestine and the land of Edom, in Berghaus' 
 Annals, 18.30, Vol. I pp. 563, 564. [Brough- 
 TON : "From Esay. to the Herods Edom hated 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Vers. 21, 22. In conclusion the Poet addresses 
 a word of threatening to Edom, in the midst of 
 which a word of comfort addressed to Zion, 
 renders the severity of the threatening still more 
 impressive. That the Edomites most maliciously 
 rejoiced in the destruction of Jerusalem, and 
 even contributed towards it, we know from Ps. 
 cxxxvii. 7; Ez. xxv. 12; xxxv. 15; xxxvi. 5. 
 See remarks on Jer. xlix. 7-22, to which the 
 ironical 'nOK/l 'tyiy, rejoice and be glad, here 
 refer. 
 
 Ver. 21. Rejoice — exult — and be glad, O 
 daughter of Edom, that dwellest in the 
 land of Uz. Whether this refers to an exten- 
 sion of the dominion of Edom that existed at 
 
CHAP. IV. 21, 22. 
 
 169 
 
 Jacob, and no leas than ten prophecies are against 
 them, as Barbinel noteth upon Obadias " Cal- 
 vin : " The Idumeans, above others, had mani- 
 fested hostility to the chosen people. And the 
 indignity was the greater, because they had de- 
 scended from the same father, for Isaac was their 
 common father; and they derived their origin 
 from two brothers, Esau and Jacob. As, then, 
 the Idumeans were related to the Jews, their 
 cruelly was less tolerable ; for they thus forgot 
 their own race, and raged against their brethren 
 and rehitives."]. — The cup also shall pass 
 through unto thee — al-w to thee shall the cup 
 pass over. [Calvin: "He employs a common 
 metaphor; for adversity is denoted in the Scrip- 
 ture by the word cup ; for God, according to His 
 will, gives to drink to each as much as He 
 pleases. . . . Nor does He allow any one either 
 to reject the cup offered, or to throw away the 
 wine, but He constrains him to drink and to ex- 
 haust, to the very dregs as much as He gives to 
 each to drink. Hence it is for this reason that 
 the Prophet says now that the cup would pass over 
 10 the Idumeans ; for we know that, shortly after, 
 iliey were subdued by the Chaldeans, with whom 
 liiey had before been united. But when they 
 had by their perfidy fallen off from their treaty, 
 t:iey were in their turn punished"]. — Thou 
 shalt be drunken. Thou shah get drunk. [By 
 drunkenness here we are to understand "that 
 judicial infatuation" (Blayney) which leads to 
 all sorts of shame and self-injury, and exposes 
 its subject to the cruel mercies of his enemies. — 
 W. H. H.]. — And shalt make thyself naked. 
 Drunkenness and denudation, intoxication and 
 shame go together: see Gen. ix. 21 ; Hab. ii. 15, Iti. 
 Ver. 22. The punishment of thine ini- 
 quity (marg. simply. Thine iniquity) is accom- 
 plished. — Blotted out is thy guilt [or we can 
 translate Dr. Naegelsbach's translation, Thy 
 debt is paid, Getilgt ist deine Schuld. Gerlach : 
 thy guilt is at an end. All the English translators, 
 except Owen, take V}? in the first member of the 
 verse as the punishment of iniquity, and in the 
 second member as iniquity itself. Owen trans- 
 lates the word iniquity in both members, but ex- 
 plains the first as meaning punishment : " to 
 complete iniquity," he says, " can here mean no 
 other thing than to complete the punishment due 
 to it." It is an awkward confusion of terms 
 and injures the antithesis between the two mem- 
 bers of the verse to put two meanings on this 
 one word. We are, doubtless, to take the word 
 in both clauses in tue sense of guilt, desert of 
 and liability to punishment, and understand the 
 whole verse as intended in a prophetical and an- 
 ticipatory sense. The exile the Jews were now 
 suffering would exhaust, as it were, the demands 
 of justice against them ; and in view of this the 
 Prophet says. Thy guilt is blotted out, or cancelled, 
 or at an end. Wordsworth: "Rather, thy sin 
 (see ver. 6) is accomplished, completed and taken 
 away; and for this use of the verb (tain) here, 
 see iii. 22; Jer. vi. 29; xliv. 12; where it is 
 rendered by consumed, and Gesen. 867." — W. H. 
 H.]. — He will no more carry thee away 
 into captivity — he tvill not banish thte longer 
 [lit. /'(« will not add to banish thee. This does not 
 imply, as many commentators seem to apprehend, 
 a promise that God would never again send the 
 
 Jewish nation into captivity. But it means only 
 that their present exile should not be prolonged 
 beyond the limit determined by their guilt. It 
 involves rather a promise of a return to their 
 own land, when their iniquity was thus cancelled 
 by the punishment received. — W. H. H.]. — He 
 will visit thine iniquity — He visits thy 
 guilt. See i. 8. — O daughter of Edom, he 
 will discover — he uncovers — thy sins. The 
 two halves of the verse correspond to each other: 
 each of them has the name of a nation for its 
 central point ; to the ^Jl^ DP, finished or cancelled 
 IS thy guilt, of the first half, corresponds the 
 'ijpi^ "ypji, he visits thine iniquity, of the second ; 
 
 and to the ^(^i /JH, lo banish thee, of the first half, 
 corresponds the HvJ, uncovers, of the second. 
 [This is more apparent in Hebrew, because the 
 last two words referred to are derived from the 
 same verbal root. Some have attempted to make 
 the correspondence complete by giving the 
 same sense to both these words. Thus Booth- 
 ROYD translates the first he will no more expose 
 thee, and the second he ivill expose thy sins. But 
 the Hiphil form of the first phrase will not allow 
 us to translate it in the same sense as the Kal 
 form of the second word, nor does the Hiphil 
 ever seem to be used in any other sense than 
 til at of leading away, causing to go away, driving 
 away, or carrying captive. Henderson, on the 
 other hand (Blayney and Owen give the same 
 sense), translates the first phrase he will no 
 more hold thee captive, and the second he will carry 
 thee away captive because of thy sins, which agrees 
 with the marginal reading in our English Bible. 
 But the Kal might mean to go away into captivity, 
 but cannot have the Hiphil sense of carrying away. 
 More than this, the grammatical construction 
 would require us to understand that he made 
 their sins captive instead of their persons. And 
 more than all the Hebrew phrase is constantly 
 used in the sense of uncovering sins, for the pur- 
 pose of exposing them to contempt, rebuke and 
 punishment. For these reasons it seems neces- 
 sary to acquiesce in the translation above given. 
 — Wordsworth: " He hath uncovered the sins 
 of Edom; and hath covered those of Israel." — 
 W. H. H.] 
 
 JVote on Authorship.* It seems to me that this 
 Song contains some hints in reference to its au- 
 thor that are worthy of consideration. 1. The 
 brilliant descriptive sketch of the Princes of 
 Judah, given by the Poet in ver. 7, should be 
 considered. 2. He charges the blame of the 
 prodigious misfortune entirely to the Priests and 
 Prophets, vers. 13-15 (see also ii. 14), whilst it 
 appears from Jeremiah that the secular leaders 
 of the people [die weltlicheu Grossen] were not 
 less guilty. See Jer. ii. 26; v. 5, 2-3-28; xxiii. 
 1, 2; xxxiv. 19; xxxvii., xxxviii. xliv. 17. His 
 way of putting things conveys to us the im- 
 pression, that the author may have been an ac- 
 complished member of the lay aristocracy, pos- 
 sessed of great love for his own particular order. 
 3. This conclusion is favored by the fact, as he 
 gives us very plainly to understand, that he was 
 
 * [This note, appended to the introduction to the chapter 
 by tlie .author, h.as been transferred to the end of ttie cliapter 
 by the Translator, in order to preserve the connection un- 
 broken.— W. H. U.j 
 
170 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 one of the companions of the king in his flight, 
 vers. 17-20. It would seem then, that he was 
 one of the polished and well-disposed Princes 
 belonging to the Court of the King. Was he, 
 perhaps, that Seraiah, who was the son of Neriah 
 and brother of Baruch (Jer. li. 59) ? [The argu- 
 ments here indicated have been already suffi- 
 ciently answered. It remains only to say, 1. 
 That Jeremiah was fully equal to a much fuller 
 and more "brilliant" description of the princes, 
 than that contained in ver. 7, both from his 
 personal knowledge of the court, and his imagi- 
 native, poetical and rhetorical abilities, as ex- 
 hibiied in his book of Prophecies. 2. The author, 
 even supposing him to be one of the Princes, can 
 not be charged with the criminal partiality of 
 attempting to throw a veil over the sins of his 
 own peers. While ver. 13 charges special guilt 
 on Prophets and Priests, as also Jeremiah (him- 
 self both Prophet and Priest) does; yet the 
 whole people are represented as given up to sin, 
 like the inhabitants of Sodom of old, ver. (J; 
 and the % with which ver. 6 begins, shows that 
 the secular nobility, represented in ver. 5 as 
 those who " fed delicately" and were "brought 
 up in scarlet," sufl"ered the punishment of their 
 own " iniquity." If it could be shown that the 
 book of the prophecies of Jeremiah, written by a 
 Prophet and Priest, souglit to extenuate the guilt 
 of those two classes and to lay the blame chiefly 
 on the secular nobility, then there might be some 
 show for the argument that this Book of Lamenta- 
 tions, which lays the onus of the guilt on Pro- 
 phets and Priests, was not written by Jeremiah. 
 But the very opposite of this is true: and in Jer. 
 xxvi. 7-24, the Prophet actually represents the 
 Princea as resisting the conspiracy of the Pro- 
 phets and Priests, to put him to deafh. Who 
 then would be more likely to show a preference 
 for the Princes, to the other two orders alluded 
 to, than Jeremiah himself? In fact, however, no 
 such preference is shown. 3. Vers. 17-19 do 
 not and cannot describe the flight and capture 
 of the king and his army. If it were possible to 
 interpret them of those events, we must decide 
 that they are anything but " graphic," and have 
 none of the characteristics which would mark the 
 report of an eye-witness of those events and a 
 participator in them. Only an author capable 
 of the brusque personation of Jeremiah in the 
 third chapter, by the abrupt introduction of " I 
 am the man," could possibly be guilty of such an 
 awkward and preposterous absorption of the 
 king, princes, and "all the men of war" in his 
 own person, by tumbling tliera all into the nar- 
 rative condensed into the single pronoun "us," 
 without any other announcement or the slightest 
 intimation of the rank, character and numbers 
 of those who now appear upon the scene. As 
 Dr. Naegelsbach can accept the absurdity in- 
 volved in the idea that Jeremiah was not the au- 
 thor of the third chapter, he can be pardoned for 
 the absurdity involved in the idea, that the " us," 
 in ver. 17 of this chapter, means king Zedekiah 
 and his companions in flight, including "all the 
 men of war." But where are the graphic fea- 
 tures of the description, "die er so anschaulicii 
 beschreibt, dass man sicli fast genothigt sieht, 
 ihn fiir einen Theilnehmer derselben zu halten," 
 t. e., that there is no escape from the conclusion 
 
 that the writer was a participant in the scenei 
 he describes? Where are the allusions to the 
 facts that they escaped under cover of the 
 "night," " by the way of the gate between the 
 two walls, which was by the king's garden," 
 that " all the men of war" went with the king 
 and that when the king was taken the army was 
 "scattered from him" (2 Kings xxv. 3-5; Jer. 
 lii. 6-8) ? On the other hand, here are facts in- 
 consistent with those referred to, that they were 
 on their watch-towers, watching for help, not at- 
 tempting escape, ver. 17, and that they could not 
 go in the streets without being arrested by those 
 who hunted their steps, ver. 18, involving the 
 idea that the city r/as already in possession of 
 the enemy, — whereas, before the enemy were 
 actually in the city, Zedekiah and his army made 
 a secret and unobserved escape, and wore not 
 pursued till after they had gone completely round 
 the walls of the city from west to east and were 
 on their way to the plains of Jericho. Finally: 
 it should be observed that the completeness of 
 the Poem requires us to interpret these last verses 
 of the events that followed the capture of the 
 king. They describe the last scene in the ca- 
 tastrophe, the feelings and the fate of the people, 
 remaining in the city, when the Chaldeans took 
 possession of it and proceeded to their work of 
 plunder, violence and destruction. And it is 
 written just as we would suppose Jeremiah, who 
 was found in imprisonment by the Chaldeans, at 
 that time, and who actually witnessed what he 
 describes, would have written it. — W. H. H.] 
 
 DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 
 
 1. Ver. 1. "If the violation of a material 
 Temple, such as that of Jerusalem formerly was, 
 is so sad and sorrowful a spectacle; how much 
 more sad and sorrowful would be the violation 
 of spiritual temples, such as the bodies of Chris- 
 tians? Yet they are violated by other crimes 
 against conscience, as well as especially by forni- 
 cation and murders (1 Cor. vi. 15-20). But woe 
 to such a violator! For he in turn shall be de- 
 stroyed by the just judgment of God (1 Cor. iii. 
 
 16, 17)." FORSTER. 
 
 2. Vers. 1, 2. The children of Zion are here 
 denoted as of noble extraction, and on that ac- 
 count compared to precious metals and precious 
 stones, which never could become so black and 
 vile, as to be thrown into the corners of the 
 streets as worthless. Israel was in fact the no- 
 bility of the human race. For the heathen are 
 nothing else than the homo communis, the ordi- 
 nary natural man, without higher life-power. 
 But Israel, as the chosen people, represented the 
 power of the higher and eternal life, though only 
 typically. Therefore it represents only, as it 
 were, the lower nobility, or nobility in the lowest 
 degree. Yet this is always a real nobility. The 
 meanest Jew carries about with him to this day, 
 in his crooked nose, a diploma of nobility, which 
 elevates him above all the nobility of our modern 
 European aristocrats, for he is thereby legiti- 
 matized as a son of Abraham. But what is this 
 and all other kinds of nobility of the earthly high- 
 born, compared to the nobility of those born 
 again of Christ through the Word and Sacra- 
 ment? Nothing but "dung," as Paul decides, 
 
CHAP- IV 
 
 171 
 
 who in Phil. iii. 8 tears hia theoci*atic patent of 
 nobility into shreds. For all that springs from 
 the earth, is perishable, corruptible, subject to 
 bondage (Gal. iv. 23-25) ; but what comes from 
 Heaven, is incorruptible, eternal, glorious, truly 
 free (Gal. iv. 26). Before that absolute nobility, 
 moreover, all earthly distinctions vanish away; 
 here is neither Jew nor Greek, here is neither 
 bond nor free, here is neither male nor female ; 
 for ye are all one in Christ Jesus (Gal. iii. 
 28). And on this account the Apostle speaks 
 such earnest words against those who violate 
 their Christian nobility (1 Cor. iii. 16, 17; vi. 
 14-16). 
 
 3. Vers. 1, 2. " We are here reminded that 
 there is no greater happiness on earth, than 
 when Churches and Schools are built, in which 
 God's pure word is preached and His worship 
 duly and rightly observed; as on the other hand, 
 there can be no greater evil than when all these 
 are destroyed, wherefore Jeremiah here mourns 
 first of all and most of all over such a destruc- 
 tion. And although Churches are not adorned 
 with gold and silver, as the Temple at Jerusa- 
 lem was, yet God's word and Divine worship 
 rightly performed are more than all silver, gold 
 and fine gold. To which purpose David says, 
 Tlie words of the Lord are pure words; as silver 
 tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times, 
 Ps. xii. 7 (G) : The law of Thy mouth is better 
 unto me than thousands of gold and silver, Ps. 
 cxix. 72. Therefore we should look to it, that 
 we do not by despising the divine word forfeit 
 such a precious treasure, as did the Jewish 
 people; on the contrary, loving God's word and 
 observing diligently a pure worship and by the 
 maintenance of pure doctrine, we should look 
 to it, that the precious gold does not grow dim 
 nor the fine gold lose its lustre." Wurtemb. 
 Summarien. 
 
 4. Ver. 2. "The Jews excelled in three re- 
 spects: in profound and accurate knowledge of 
 God (Ps. cxlvii. 20); secondly, in the beauty of 
 a virtuous life (Sir. xliv. 6); thirdly, in careful 
 observance of a pure worship (1 Mac. iv. 43)."' 
 Thomas Aquinas, in Ghisler., p. 176. 
 
 5. Ver. 2. " Sons of Zion, to wit of that 
 looked-for city, which the Lord hath built, that 
 it may be seen in its glory, — sons of the supernal 
 Jerusalem, wnich is free, our mother; illustrious 
 by the dignity of their condition ; clothed in the 
 primest gold, by their likeness to God. How 
 then have we, who have become esteemed as 
 earthen vessels, degenerated from these [Sons 
 of Zion] into these vile and fragile bodies!" 
 Bernhard v. Clairv. in Ghisler., S. 177. 
 
 6. Ver. 2'. " Let men of noble rank regard this 
 as said to themselves, lest, because they are 
 likened to gold on account of the celebrity of their 
 family, they grow proud and imperious, but 
 rather let them be persuaded to remember, that 
 they are in the hands of the celestial potter (Sir. 
 xxxiii. 13), who can easily transmute gold into 
 earthen vessels, yea, and break these up into 
 pieces (Ps. ii. 9)." Forster. [Scott: "The 
 glory of outward distinctions and privileges may 
 soon be obscured: Sin tarnishes the beauty of 
 the most excellent gifts; and when the Lord 
 leaves churches, or nations, their 'glory is de- 
 parted.' But that 'gold tried in the fire' which 
 
 Christ bestows, will never be taken from us; not 
 can its excellency be diminished."] 
 
 7. Vers. 3, 4. [Scott: "Extreme nece.-ssity 
 has a tendency to render the heart callous and 
 unfeeling: they who have improperly indulged 
 their children when in prosperity, have often been 
 most regardless of them in distress: and the hu- 
 man species lias frequently been found more 
 cruel and insensible, than the most ferocious and 
 stupid of the irrational creatures."] 
 
 8. Ver. 5. ^'^ Per quod quispeccat, per idem puni- 
 iur et ipse, that in which a man sins is the means 
 of his punishment." Foester. [Henry: "It is 
 the wisdom of those who have abundance, not lo 
 use themselves too nicely, for then hardships, 
 when they come, will be doubly hard, Deut. xxviii. 
 56."]. 
 
 9. Ver. 6. "As the grace afforded us in the ma- 
 nifestation of the word of God is greater than that 
 given to the inhabitants of Sodom, so is our im- 
 penitence more heinous, and severer punishment 
 on that account is to be expected. So Christ 
 clearly shows in Matt. xi. 20-24. Verily! we 
 should not despise this thunder-clap ; for it cer- 
 tainly applies to us, who are richly endowed 
 with the gospel, but do not walk consistently 
 with it or worthily of it, but its daily invitations, 
 inducements, and warnings are given to the 
 wind; thus, as the Prophet Jeremiah here says, 
 The iniquity of my people is greater than the 
 sin of Sodom, that was suddenly overthrown." 
 Egid. Hunnius. "The sin of the people called 
 of God is always the greatest, because it has 
 most abused the revelation of God. Therefore is 
 its punishment also worse than that of Sodom, 
 which was suddenly destroyed, without suffering 
 long torments from barbarous enemies. God 
 often chastises us here longer than He does the 
 heathen ; but He does it to spare us the punish- 
 ment which is eternal." Diedrich. 
 
 10. Ver. 6. " AVe are admonished here, that as. 
 there is disparity of i^unishments, so is there dis- 
 parity [in the heinousness] of sins. Hence the 
 paradox of the Stoics, who esteemed all sins equal, 
 is shown to be false." Forster. "The iniquity of 
 the Jewish people was rendered greater tlian the 
 sin of the inhabitants of Sodom, because the 
 latter transgressed only the law of nature, while 
 the former transgressed both natural and written 
 law." Rhabanus in Ghisler., p. 185. 
 
 11. Vers. 7, 8. This is an instructive example 
 of the perishable and transient nature of all 
 merely earthly splendor. What is there in all 
 the beauty, wealth, and pomp of the young 
 noblemen and their wives and daughters! Can 
 there be a finer picture of the aristocrat's coa- 
 dition than we read here in the seventh verse? 
 Is not the difference between the common race 
 of man and the nobly bred placed here before 
 our eyes in the distinctest manner? Yet, it is 
 seen from ver. 8, that if our Lord God has only 
 hung the bread-basket above their reach, the 
 bodies of princes make no belter show than those 
 of burghers and peasants. From which we learn 
 that there is no essential difference between 
 them. 
 
 12. Ver. 7. "Kings and Princes, their courts 
 and courtiers appear, now-a-days, just the same 
 as they were long ago portrayed in David's 
 Psalms, in the Ecclesiastes and Proverbs of 
 
172 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 Solomon, and in the Wisdom of Sirach. What 
 we say of them now in German, Latin, or French, 
 is just what was said long ago in Hebrew or 
 Syriac." Doctor Leidemit, p. 43. 
 
 13. Ver. 9. "Four principal judgments are 
 especially enumerated by the Prophet Ezekiel 
 in his fourteenth chapter ; namely, War, Famine, 
 Pestilence, and Wild-beasts. Of these, Famine 
 is by no means the least, but by far the greatest 
 and most severe, so that here, in the Lamenta- 
 tions, it is said. That it may have been better 
 for those killed by the sword than for those who 
 perislied through hunger. But this is not meant 
 of hunger that happens by chance, or is the re- 
 sult of natural causes alone, but we must regard 
 scarcity and starvation as God's rod (Deut. xxviii. 
 23, 2-4)." Egid. Hunnius. 
 
 14. Ver. 10. If mothers cooked their children, 
 this was an unnatural crime, only to be explained 
 as the effects of blind madness. But had not 
 Israel also, against its better nature, forgotten 
 theHeavenlyFather (Is. i. 2-4)? [Henry: "This 
 horrid effect of long sieges had been threatened in 
 general. Lev. xxvi. 29; Deut. xxviii. 53, and 
 particularly against Jerusalem, in the siege of 
 the Chaldeans, Jer. xix. 9 ; Ez. v. 10. I know not 
 whether to make it an instance of the power of 
 necessity, or of iniquity ; but as the Gentile idola- 
 ters were justly ^wen upto vile affections, Rom. i. 26, 
 80 these Jewish idolaters, and the women parti- 
 cularly, who had made cakes to the queen of Heaven, 
 and taught their children to do so too, were st)-ipt 
 of natural affection, and that to tlieir own children. 
 Being thus left to dishonor their own nature, was 
 a righteous judgment on them for the dishonor 
 they had done to God."] 
 
 15. Ver. 11. "The Lord accomplished His 
 fury upon Jerusalem, when her wickedness was 
 full, just as the sins of the Amorites were, when 
 they were destroyed (Gen. xv. 16). He did, in- 
 deed, pour out [effudit) the fire of His indigna- 
 tion, but it was only when slie (Jerusalem) had 
 abandoned herself [se diffudit) to the commission 
 of all sorts of vices and crimes ; and He devoured 
 her foundations, when she had refused to accept 
 the foundation, which is Christ. Truly she re- 
 jected Him, the precious, square stone, laid at 
 the foundation of our whole structure : Who, 
 when He saw this same unhappy Jerusalem, 
 wept over her, saying, that in her not one stone 
 should be left upon another (Matt. xxiv. 2)." 
 Paschasius in Ghisler., p. 192. 
 
 16. Ver. 11. [Calvin: Prayer. "Grant, Al- 
 mighty God, that as Thou showest by Thy Pro- 
 phet that, after having long borne with Thine 
 ancient people. Thy wrath at length did so far 
 burn as to render that judgment above all others 
 remarkable, — grant that we may not, at this 
 day. by our obstinacy or by our sloth, provoke 
 Thy wrath, but be attentive to Thy threatenings, 
 yea, and obey Thy paternal invitations, and so 
 willingly devote ourselves to Thy service, that as 
 Thou hast hitherto favored us with Thy blessings, 
 so Thou may est perpetuate them, until we shall 
 at length enjoy the fulness of all good tilings 
 in Thy celestial kingdom, through Christ our 
 Lord. Amen."] 
 
 17. Ver. 12. "The Holy Ghost here teaches 
 us that tiiere is on earth no city so secure, no 
 kingdom so powerful, no stronghold so impreg- 
 
 nable, that it may not be destroyed by sins and 
 unrighteousness (as by the strongest battering- 
 rams, Cramer). On that account, to trust in 
 strongholds is idle, and is rebuked and con- 
 demned by the Holy Ghost." Egid. Hunnius. 
 " The heathen princes themselves had not before 
 this believed tliat such a calamity could happen 
 to Jerusalem, for they regarded it with a certain 
 feeling of awe, because they liad an inward tes- 
 timony that the true God had prepared there a 
 place for His manifestation." Diedrich. 
 
 18. Ver. 13. " The Holy Spirit further teaches 
 us here what a corrupt condition ensues in the 
 whole spiritual theocracy, when those quit the 
 right path of the only true, genuine service of 
 God, who should most of all keep to it, namely, 
 the teachers among the people, who should be to 
 tiiem those whose lips should preserve instruc- 
 tion, and out of their mouth should be sought 
 the law of the Lord of Sabaoth. When they let 
 God's word and pure instruction slip, the people 
 are well-nigh done for. Then follow all the pre- 
 posterous things which Jeremiah here indicates 
 by the mention of false Prophets and bloody- 
 minded Priests." Egid. Hunnius. [Calvin: 
 " This passage teaches us that Satan has from the 
 beginning polluted the sanctuary of God, by 
 means even of sacred names ; for the prophetic 
 office was honorable — so also was the sacerdotal. 
 God had established among His people the priest- 
 hood, which was, as it were, a living image of 
 Christ: there was then nothing more excellent 
 than the priesthood under the Law, if we regard 
 the institution of God. It was also a singular 
 blessing thatGod promised that His people should 
 never be without Prophets. As then Prophets 
 and Priests were two eyes, as it were, in the 
 Church, the devil turned them to every kind of 
 profanation. This example then reminds us how 
 much we ought to watch, lest empty titles de- 
 ceive us, which are nothing but masks or spec- 
 tres [phantoms]. When we hear the name of 
 Church and pastors, we ought reverently to re- 
 gard the office as well as the order which has 
 proceeded from God, provided we are not con- 
 tent with naked titles, but examine whether the 
 reality also corresponds. Thus, we see that the 
 whole world has, for many ages, degenerated 
 from true religion; under what pretext? even 
 this, — that those who led astray miserable souls 
 boasted that they were the vicars of Christ, the 
 successors of the apostles, so that they still arro- 
 gantly boast of these titles, and are inflated with 
 them. But we see what happened in the time 
 of Jeremiah. . . . Prophets and Priests had de- 
 stroyed the very Church of God." — Wordsworth : 
 "This sin of the Priests and Prophets of Jeru- 
 salem, who conspired against Jeremiah, and slew 
 other servants of God, reached its height when 
 thei/ murdered the Just One; see the words of 
 Christ, Matt, xxiii. 31, 37; and of the first 
 martyr, Acts vii. 52; and of St. Paul, 1 Thes. ii. 
 15; and those of James the Just, who himself 
 was murdered by them at Jerusalem, Jam. v. 6.'] 
 
 19. Ver. 13 — 15. "Thence follows the most 
 pernicio\is corruption, and from that again the 
 persecution of the really true doctrine and of its 
 faithful followers and servants. . . . This is always 
 the way and character ecclesix malignantium, that 
 is to say, of the congregation and faction of 
 
CHAP. IV. 
 
 173 
 
 malicious hypocrites, inquisitors and conspir- 
 ators, that they, from perverted love for their 
 preconceived error and prejudice, are excited 
 and inflamed by instigation of the evil spirit 
 with such bitter hatred against pure doctrine 
 and its faithful defenders, that they begin to 
 maintain their error with fist and sword, and to 
 persecute the churches of God, and thus sprinkle 
 themselves with the blood of the righteous, to 
 ahed which they incite others, and give them 
 counsel and help thereto. . . . Further, as those 
 priests, in Jeremiah's time, covered over and 
 adorned all their falsehoods and tyranny with 
 the pretence of the succession and of the titles 
 and names of the church, on which account they 
 cried out against Jeremiah, Templum Dei, Tem- 
 plum Dei, ' here is the Temple of the Lord, here 
 is the temple of the Lord, here is the Temple of 
 the Lord' Jer. vii. 4; and, again, Jer. xviii. 18, 
 ' Come, let us devise devices against Jeremiah ; 
 for the law shall not perish from the priest, nor 
 counsel from the wise, nor the word from the 
 Prophet;' so in our day, the constant everlasting 
 cry, with the Pope and his crowd, that they 
 shout against us, is — Church, Church, Church ! 
 The Pope cannot err in the faith and articles of 
 religion, for he is a successor of St. Peter, and 
 sits in his chair. Yet the church of God is not 
 so bound to the external succession or order but 
 that those, who certainly were in the orderly 
 external succession of the Levitical priesthood, 
 established by God Himself, in Jeremiah's time, 
 and also in Christ's, wandered far, far away from 
 the truth, and those who sat in Moses' seat, 
 namely the Scribes and Pharisees, became the 
 bitterest enemies of our Lord Jesus Christ and 
 of His chosen, holy church (Matt, xxiii.). What 
 then may not happen in the case of the Pope, 
 who can, without difficulty, prove that God in 
 the New Testament proposes to have a Pope who 
 shall exalt himself over all, but in fact, through 
 St. Paul, has designated such a Primate of the 
 Papacy as an unfailing sign of the Antichrist ? 
 (2 Thess. ii. 3, 4)." Eqid. Hunnius. 
 
 20. Vers. 13, 14. " Such to-day are the sangui- 
 nary priests of Rome, and especially the Jesuits, 
 who wish to be esteemed priests /car' i^oxyv- • • ■ 
 Hence those famous emblems of theirs (Jesuitae in 
 Censura Coloniensi, Fol. 136): 'If Luther had 
 been removed before his fortieth year by fire or 
 sword, or if others were removed from the midst 
 of us, the whole world would not be confounded 
 by such abominable dissensions.' In accordance 
 with these sentiments are those of Andrew 
 Fabricius Leodius, Counsellor of the Princes of 
 Bavaria, in his Preface to the Harmony of Au- 
 gustine's Confessions, 'Let our most mighty em- 
 peror gird his sword upon his thigh, and subdue 
 these heretics, the most pernicious enemies of the 
 Christian name. The shedding of Lutheran blood 
 is useful, for by that means the members are pre- 
 served entire.' " Forster. 
 
 21. Vers. 13, 14. " WhenGod hasinview thepu- 
 rification and reformation of an ecclesiastical con- 
 stitution, dependence is, least of all, to be placed 
 on Theologians by jt^ro/Ms/ow, and their assistance 
 and support, or even only their comprehension 
 and assent. AVhen the economy of the Old Testa- 
 ment came to an end, the Priests and Scribes 
 were the bitterest enemies and persecutors of 
 
 Jesus and His doctrine, the stupidest in the whole 
 world to understand the Scriptures which testi 
 fled of Him. Hirss and other witnesses for tht 
 Truth, were adjudged to the funeral-pile, not by 
 the laity, but by their own colleges and profes- 
 sional associates. How was it in this respect in 
 Ldtheb's time? The Princes and laity were 
 always more just, more tolerant, more easily 
 convinced of the truth, more prepossessed in its 
 favor, than the Bishops, the Scholars and the 
 clergy generally." Doctor Leidemit, p. 44. 
 
 22. Ver. 15. [Henry: "They upbraided th« 
 corrupt Priests and Prophets, with their pre- 
 tended purity, while they lived in all manner of 
 real iniquity. You were so precise, you would 
 not touch a Gentile, but cried. Depart, depart, 
 stand by thyself, I am holier than thou. Is. Ixv. 5. 
 Thus the prosecutors of Christ would not go into 
 the judgment- hall, lest they should he defiled. But 
 can you now keep the Gentiles from touching 
 you, when God has delivered you into their 
 hands? When you fly away and wander, . . . 
 these serpents will not be charmed or enchanted 
 
 . . . no, they will not respect the persons of the 
 priests, nor favor the elders." — Scott. "The 
 wickedness of those who are by office engaged to 
 support religion, and yet betrary her interests, is 
 the great cause of national judgments, and of the 
 ruin of flourishing churches: especially when 
 they have shed the blood of the just in the midst 
 of them. They who have thus polluted their gar- 
 ments, have commonly been recompensed in the 
 same way; and rendered an execration even to 
 the vilest of mankind."] 
 
 23. Ver. 17. "Hence appears the truth of 
 David's apothegms in Ps. cxviii. 8, 9 ; cxlvi. 3, 
 4; with which accords Jer. xvii. 5;" as well as 
 the Son of Sirach, vi. 7-9, where, on the margin, 
 Ldther wrote these beautiful rhymes, 
 
 Freunde in der Noth 
 
 Gehen 25 auf ein Loth. 
 
 SoUt's ein barter Stand sein, 
 
 Gehen 50 auf ein Quintlein." Forster. 
 
 "Pious people should, according to this, avoid 
 putting their trust in men, as a great sin and a 
 species of idolatry, and all the more because all 
 such trust in men leads us into danger, finally 
 disappoints us and covers us with shame. For 
 men either wish not to help us, or when they are 
 willing they cannot, or when they promise it, 
 they do not keep their promise, for their very 
 nature is vanity. Hence David takes occasion to 
 dissuade us from trusting in men or gazing after 
 them, when he says in Ps. Ixii., Men are only 
 vanity ; men of high degree are wanting, they 
 weigh less than nothing, whatever they may 
 be." Egid. HuNNirs. 
 
 24. Ver. 18. "Here occurs a proof text con- 
 cerning the fatal end and period of atfairs, which 
 is decreed, as our text bears witness, to cities 
 and nations, — nay to all things iu the universe 
 (Eccl. iii.. Sir. xiv. 20), but above all to indi- 
 vidual men (Job xiv., Ps. cxxxix. 16). That end 
 depends indeed on the foreknowledge of God, but 
 not simply and absolutely on that foreknowledge, 
 but as that foreknowledge is directed witli re- 
 gard to second causes, especially with reference 
 to piety and impiety, as is attested both by the 
 promises of God, such as that added to the luur'h 
 
174 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JERKMTAH. 
 
 [fifth] commandment (Epb. vi. 2. 3). ivrul hy His 
 threatenings, Ps. Iv. 24 (23). Heuce it appears, 
 that the end of human life is not so definitely or- 
 dained as by fate, because it can be prolonged 
 by the practice of piety, and shortened by the 
 practice of impiety." Fouster. 
 
 25. Ver. 19. [Calvin: "When the hand of 
 God is against us, we in vain look around in all 
 directions, for there will be no safety for us on 
 mountains; nor will solitude protect us in the de- 
 sert. As. then, we see that the Jews were closed 
 up by God's hand, so when we contend with Him, 
 we in vain turn our eyes here and there; for, 
 however, we may for a time entertain good hopes, 
 yet God will surely at last disappoint us.'"] 
 
 2G. Ver. 20. In the Sept. the verse reads; 
 The Spirit of our countenance, Christ the Lord ivas 
 taken in their destruciion [avveAijcfidri 'ev ralq 6ia- 
 (p-&opalQ), of whom we saic^. In his shadow will ive 
 dwell among the nations. Jerome translates. The 
 Spirit of our mouth, Christ the Lord, was taken in 
 our sins, to whom we said, In thy shadow icill toe 
 dwell among the nations. It is, therefore, not to 
 be wondered at that this passage was regarded 
 by the ancients generally as one of the most de- 
 cided Messianic prophecies. "This text," says 
 Ghislek., "was very frequently quoted by the 
 early Fathers, and was interpreted by their com- 
 mon consent of Christ the Son of God." A col- 
 lection of the various patristical expositions may 
 be found in Ghisler. They make chiefly a three- 
 fold use of the text. 1. Tertulli.\n proves from 
 it against Praxeas (cap. 14), that the Father 
 could in no sense have been a fades [form or 
 manifestation] of the Son, but, on the contrary, 
 the Son was a fades [manifestation] of the 
 Father. 2. They recognize in this passage a 
 clear prediction of the suiferings of Christ. Thus, 
 for example, Theodoret says, "Let the Jews 
 say, Whom does the word of prophecy call Christ ? 
 "Who of those called Christs by them, whether 
 king, or prophet, or priest, has been named Lord 
 ((ciyjwf)? But they could not point to such an 
 instance, although they made use of much false- 
 hood. It is evident, therefore, that the Propliet 
 foretold as the Saviour and our Lord (Kiipiov), 
 Him who has been taken by them through the 
 destruction of their impiety." [Theodoret 
 adapts his language to that of the Septuagint 
 (see above), c!vAlr]<pdevTa tto// avri^v fiia tt/v rf/g 
 aae(idag avTuv diaf'&opav. — W. H. H.] 3. But 
 they find also the calling of the Gentiles predicted 
 in this text. Orioen, particularly, says this 
 (Horn, on Cant. ii. 3) with reference to Luke i. 35, 
 "If, therefore, the overshadowing of the Most 
 High attended the conception of His (Christ's) 
 body, it is reasonable that Hia shadow shall give 
 life to the Gentiles." 
 
 27. Ver. 20. " The question arises, how could 
 these titles (Messiah, breath of the people' s nostrils, 
 shadow), apply to the wicked king Zedekiah? 
 They apply to him, not by reason of his personal 
 character, but 1st, by reason of his office, which 
 Duglit to have been, and was expected by the 
 He Drews to be what these titles import. 2d. By 
 n asr)n of the Antitype, of whom David, with his 
 P'l-iierity, in his kingly office was a type. But 
 w.io is this Antitype? Our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 111 ■ son of David according to the flesh (2 Tim. 
 ii.. Rom. i.), that anointed one of the Lord (Luke 
 
 ii. 26). whose breath is in His nostrils (Is. ii 22). 
 and who is our shadow against the heat of (Icni s 
 wrath (Is. xxv. 4), and to whom the Lord God 
 gave the throne of His Father David (Lukei. 32, 
 33). Magistrates are here admonished both of 
 the authority and the functions of theii office. 
 They, too, can be called by that name of au. 
 thority — the anointed of the Lord. And the func- 
 tions of their office are, that they may be, by 
 their counsel and efficient aid, the breath of the 
 nostrils, — and such a shadow as that prefigured 
 in the tree in Dan. iv. 7-9 (10-12)." Forster. 
 
 28. Ver 21. " Here is a proof-text concerning 
 eiTLxaLpEKaKia, rejoicing in the misfortunes of 
 others, from which crime Christians, of all men, 
 sliould be furthest removed. For those who de- 
 light in the misfortunes of others, stripped of all 
 humanity, no longer imitate the tastes and dis- 
 positions of mankind, but those of the devil." 
 Forster. — Cup. Fokster remarks here that the 
 figure of a cup is used metaphorically in three 
 ways. 1. Cup denotes the misfortune of the 
 righteous as well as that of the ungodly, Ps. 
 Ixxv. 2. It denotes the good or bad fortune of 
 the righteous, Ps. cxvi. ; Matt. xx. 22; xxiii. 
 39, 42; Mark x. 38; John xviii. 11. 3. It de- 
 notes the misfortune of the ungodly. Is. Ii. 17,22; 
 ■ler. xxv. 15; Lam. iv. 21; Ez. xxiii. 31; Hab. 
 ii. 16; Rev. xiv. 10; xvi. 19. 
 
 29. Ver. 21. " We learn from this that God has 
 filled their certain measure of trouble for all men, 
 and He lets the cup pass round and no one is 
 overlooked, as it is written in Ps. Ixxv., The 
 Lord has a cup in His hand, and fills it full of 
 strong wine, and pours out from the same, but 
 the ungodly must drink up the dregs. That is, 
 the pious must also drink of the cup of worm- 
 wood, sorrow and pain. But Christ has pre- 
 sented for them the foretasted cup of such a bit- 
 ter, sour potion, and with the wood of His cross 
 has made sweet and tolerable for His own to 
 drink the bitter waters of Mara, as is beautifully 
 and figuratively represented in Ez. xv. 23-25. 
 But the ungodly must at last taste the lees and 
 dregs of God's wrath, which potion constitutes 
 their final and utter ruin." Egip Hi^nnius. 
 
 30. Ver. 22. He will no more carry thee 
 avyay into captivity. " Here it is, indeed, 
 averred, that the Lord would not after this again 
 cause the people to remove from the land, which 
 certainly seems to conflict with the prolonged 
 exile which the Jews at this day are enduring. 
 But the answer is easy and obvious, from the 
 rule commonly accepted by Theologians: All 
 God's promises are to be understood as having 
 the condition of penitence annexed to them." 
 Forster. 
 
 31. Vers. 21-22. "Zion's punishment will some- 
 time have an end, because God in spite of all His 
 judgments upon His people, will yet fulfil His 
 kingdom; the punishment of Edom, on the con- 
 trary, and of all maliciously disposed worldly 
 powers, is eternal and without hope. Heathen- 
 dom, as such, cannot be regenerated, notwith- 
 standing all God's judgments ; it can only perish, 
 because it has not God's word. But the greater 
 is God's punishment of His people, the more sure 
 is His plun for their salvation. That same Christ, 
 who said, ' Father, if it be possible, let this cup 
 pass from Me,' and sweat blood, yet most cer- 
 
CHAP. IV. 
 
 ::5 
 
 tainly was and continued of His own accord and 
 by His own act in the bitterest agony of death 
 and in the deepest humiliation, and He has 
 brought to light our eternal victory, for as many 
 of us as abide in faith on His word, however 
 helpless at present we may be in ourselves. Christ 
 is our life and our strength." Diedrich. 
 
 32. Ver. 22. [Calvin: Peayer. "Grant, Al- 
 mighty God, that as Thou seest that at this day 
 the mouths not only of our enemies, but of Thine 
 also, are open to speak evil, — grant that no oc- 
 casion may be given them, especially as their 
 slanders are cast on Thy holy name ; but restrain 
 Thou their insolence, and so spare us, that 
 though we deserve to be chastised, Thou mayest 
 yet nave regard for Thine own glory, and thus 
 gather us under Christ our Head, and restore 
 Thy scattered Church, until we shall at length 
 be all gathered into that celestial kingdom, which 
 Thine only-begotten Son our Lord has procured 
 for us by His own blood. Amen."] 
 
 HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 
 
 1. Vers. 1-6. The destruction of Jerusalem by 
 the Chaldeans an example of God's great and im- 
 partial righteousness. 1. Israel was among the 
 nations, what gold is among the metals and pre- 
 cious stones are among minerals, vers. 1, 2. 2. 
 But the sin of Israel was greater than the sin of 
 Sodom, ver. 6. 8. Therefore the punishment of 
 Israel was severer than that of Sodom, vers. 3-5. 
 
 2. Vers. 7-11. The relation of spiritual hunger 
 to physical. 1. The relation as it should be. a. 
 Both are sanctioned, Matt. vi. 11, 82 ; 1 Tim. vi. 
 8. b. But spiritual exigency should have the 
 preference. Matt. vi. 33 ; iv. 4 ; xvi. 5-12 ; Jno. 
 vi. 27, 32-35. 2. The relation as it should not 
 be, Luke xvi. 19-31. 3. The consequences of 
 the perversion of the right relation, a. With 
 regard to physical hunger, Lam. iv. 7-11. b. 
 With regard to spiritual huiif^er, Amos, viii. 11, 
 12 ; Rev. ii. 5. 
 
 3. Vers. 12-16. The warning, which John 
 Baptist gave to the Jews, Begin not to say within 
 yourselves. We have Abraham to our Father 
 (Luke iii. 8), concerns all persons and communi- 
 ties, in this day, who believe that they are as- 
 sured of their Divine vocation. How well 
 grounded this warning was, could be shown at 
 that time by a reference to the first destruction 
 of Jerusalem. Let us avail ourselves of the same 
 fact in order to impress the solemn truth, that no 
 Divine vocation can save us from eventual destruction. 
 For, 1. Israel's vocation was (a) attested by the 
 promises given to the Patriarchs; (6), confirmed 
 by many proofs of actual Divine interposition in 
 their behalf; (c), recognized even by the hea- 
 then. 2. This Tocation was not unconditional, as 
 carnal Israel imagined. 3. The non-fulfilment 
 of the conditions, for which the Priests and Pro- 
 phets were chiefly guilty, ensured as a conse- 
 
 quence the judgment of the first destruction. 
 Conclusioti : What befell Israel, the natural olive 
 tree, may much more readily befall that which is 
 only an engrafted branch (Rom. xi. 12) of the 
 same. 
 
 4. Vers. 12-16. 77ie great responsibility of those 
 possessed of spiritual authority. 1. The duty is 
 imposed upon them, of directing the people by 
 word and example to keep the conditions on 
 which the Divine promises have been given. 2. 
 To them belongs the guilt, if by their neglect, 
 the people find the curse instead of the blessing. 
 
 5. Vers. 17-19. Human help is useless. For, 1. 
 It, is by itself, impotent. 2. Those who depend 
 upon it, (a), experience the pain of disappointed 
 expectation; (6), they come to a terrible end. 
 
 6. Ver. 20. The reciprocal duties of rulers and 
 subjects. 1. The duties which subjects owe to 
 their rulers. It is to be observed, that the Pro- 
 phet, " in this text confers an honorable title on 
 the ungodly king Zedekiah, that he calls him the 
 Anointed of the Lord, and here a beautiful lesson 
 is taught us, with what respect we should regard 
 and speak of our superiors and rulers, and honor 
 in them the office, which God has conferred upon 
 them, even if in personal character they are 
 wicked and ungodly." 2. The duties which 
 rulers owe to their subjects. Let them remember 
 that their " office, in the words of the Prophet 
 should be, next to God and under God, a refuge 
 under whose shadow their poor subjects may 
 live." Egid. Hunnius 
 
 7. Vers. 21, 22. The reciprocal relation of those 
 who suffer and those who take pleasure in the suffer- 
 ings of others. 1. That one, who first has suffer- 
 ing, will afterwards have joy, if he bear his 
 sutfering in the right way. 2. That one, who 
 first has malicious pleasure in the sufferings of 
 others, will at last have sufferings himself, [a), 
 because he has calumniated God by the presump- 
 tion that He was not influenced by love in His 
 punishments; (6), because he has been destitute 
 of love to his neighbor and thereby has provoked 
 against himself the sentence of retaliation 
 (Mark iv. 24). 
 
 8. Ver. 22. [Henry: " 1. An end shall be 
 put to Zion's troubles. The punishment of thine 
 ijiiquity is accomplished, daughter of Zion. The 
 troubles of God's people shall be continued no 
 longer, than till they have done the work for 
 which they were sent. 2. An end shall be put 
 to Edom's triumphs. He will visit thine iniquity, 
 daughter of Edom. It is spoken ironically in 
 ver. 21, Rejoice and be glad, O daughter of Edom. 
 This is a good reason why we should not insult 
 over any who are in misery, because we our- 
 selves also are in the body. But those who 
 please themselves in the calamities of God's 
 church, must expect to have their doom, as 
 aiders and abettors, with them that are instru- 
 mental in those calamities. Sooner or later, sin 
 will be visited aud diso»vered."] 
 
176 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 Chapter V. 
 
 DISTRESS AND HOPE OF THE PRISONERS AND FUGITIVES : [EXPRESSED IN THE FORM OP A PBATaK; 
 OR, E. v., A PITIFUL COMPLAINT OF ZION IN PRAYER UNTO QOD. W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 1. Remember, Jehovah, what has come upon us! 
 
 Look down and see our reproach. 
 Ver. 2. Our inheritance has fallen to strangers, 
 
 Our houses to aliens. 
 Ver. 3. We have become orphans, without father, 
 
 Our mothers — as widows. 
 Ver. 4. Our water we have drunk for money, 
 
 Our wood comes for a price. 
 Ver. 5. On our necks we have been pursued ; 
 
 We have been weary, — there was no rest for ui. 
 Ver. 6. Towards Egypt have we stretched the hand, — 
 
 Towards Assyria, — to be satisfied with bread. 
 Ver. 7. Our fathers sinned. They are no more ; 
 
 We have borne their iniquities. 
 Ver. 8. Servants have ruled over us : 
 
 There was none to deliver from their hand. 
 Ver. 9. At the peril of our lives we get our bread, 
 
 Because of the sword of the desert. 
 Ver. 10. Our skin has been parched as an oven. 
 
 Because of the ragings of hunger. 
 
 Ver. 11. Women in Zion have been humbled, — 
 
 Virgins — in the cities of Judah. 
 Ver. 12. Princes have been hung up by the hand : 
 
 The persons of Elders have not beeo honored. 
 Ver. 13. Young men have carried mill-stones; 
 
 And boys have fallen under [burdens of] wood. 
 
 Ver. 14. Elders have forsaken the gate, — 
 
 Young men — their music. 
 Ver. 15. Ceased has the joy of our heart; 
 
 Our dance has been changed to mourning. 
 Ver. 16. The crown has fallen from our head. 
 
 Woe unto us ! for we have sinned. 
 Ver. 17. For this our heart has become faint ; 
 
 For these things our eyes have become dim. 
 Ver. 18. As to Mount Zion, which has become desolate. 
 
 The foxes have walked upon it ! 
 
 Ver. 19. But Thou, Jehovah, reignest forever ; 
 
 Thy throne is from generation to generation. 
 Ver. 20. Wherefore should'st Thou always forget us, 
 
 And abandon us for length of days ? 
 Ver. 21. Turn us, Jehovah, unto Thee, and we shall turn; 
 
 Renew our days as of old ; — 
 Ver. 22. If Thou hast not utterly rejected us, 
 
 And art wroth against us exceedingly ! 
 
 ANALYSIS. 
 
 The iuiject is chipfly composed of the particular incidents of those grievous days which followed the capture 
 of Jerusalem. The Poet lets the people speak, yet not as an ideal female person, but in the first person 
 plural as a concrete multitude. The Son;/ is divided into an introduction, ver. 1, two principal parts. 
 
CHAP. V. 1-22. 
 
 177 
 
 vers. 2-7, 8-16, and a conclusion, vers. 17-22. In the introduction, ver. 1, the Lord is entreated to 
 regard the sorrows that had befallen Zion [the peoplel . In the following two principal parts, vers. 2- 1 6, 
 these sorrows are described in detail. The first part embraces vers. 2-7. All their property, fixed and 
 movable, is seized by the enemy, ver. 2 ; families are scattered, fathers have disappeared, mothers are 
 as widows, ver. 3 ; the captives receive no subsistence, they must buy what they need, though as the 
 product of their own land it is really their own properly, ver. 4; on the march to Babylon, they are 
 driven beyond their strength, and no rest is allowed them, ver. 5. Besides all this, the w-hole people 
 do not even remain together. Whilst one party is compelled to throw itself into the arms of the Egyp- 
 tians, another party belotiga to Assyria; both are in such straits as to rejoice if able only to prolong 
 their lives, ver. 6. But this great misfortune is caused by the sins of the fathers, the consequences of 
 which now their posterity have to bear, ver. 7. The second principal part embraces rera. 8-16. 
 Whilst those forced to Babylon groan under the rods of the rough servants, who are their driver.t. ver. 
 8, those who wander to Egypt, must seek for subsistence amidst constant danger from (he robbers of 
 the desert, ver. 9: both parties suffer the consuming pangs of hunger, ver. 10. To this is now added 
 a recital, partly the recollection of what had already been endured, partly an exhibition of what tliey 
 still experienced, of the sufferings from which no class of the population was exempted : women have 
 been dishonored, ver. 11 ; noble princes hung up or outrageously ill-treated, ver. 12 ; young men com- 
 pelled to carry heavy hand-mills, and boys loads of ivood, ver. 13. Sitting in the gate — the delight and 
 glory of old men, and playing on stringed instruments — the pleasure of young men, have come to an end, 
 ver. 14. In gefieral, among all classes, deep mourning has succeeded to pleasure and joy, ver. 15. 
 The crown of glory has fallen from the head of Zion, and, verily, those who suffer this, are obliged to 
 acknowledge, that it has happened, not merely because their fathers had sinned (ver. 7), but because 
 they themselves have sinned, ver. 16. The conclusion contains a prayer, to which vers. 17, 18 are 
 introductory. In these verses it is declared, that all the affliction of the Israelites culminates in the 
 destruction of the Sanctuary. But this thought suggests the encouragement, which the Poet now pre- 
 sents in his prayer ; although the external Sanctuary is destroyed. Thou Thyself, Lord, remainest 
 for ever, ver. 19. Wherefore shouldest Thou forget and forsake Thy people for ever? ver. 20. 
 Lead us back to Thyself, that we may be again what loe have been in former times, ver. 21. This 
 will be done, for it is not to be supposed, that Thou canst have utterly rejected us, ver. 22. [Ver. 1, 
 introductory ; vers. 2-10, descriptive of general suffering from oppression and ivant of necessaries of 
 life; vers. 11-18, instances of individual suffering; vers. 14-18, effect on the feelings and senti- 
 ments of the people ; vers. 19-22, the prayer. — W. H. H.] 
 
 PRELIMINARY NOTE 0« CH. V. 
 
 This chapter is not acrostic. Yet it is evident 
 from the agreement of the number of the verses 
 with the number of the letters of the alphabet, 
 that the chapter should be regarded as belonging 
 to the four preceding ones as a member of the 
 same family. The acrostic is wanting, because 
 the contents are in prose. The Poet would 
 make apparent, even in the external form, the 
 decrescendo movement, which we perceive from 
 the third chapter onward. Were there not 22 
 verses, this chapter might be regarded as an en- 
 tirely disconnected supplement. But the number 
 of verses is a vinculum, that in a way even ex- 
 ternally observable, unites this prosaic chapter 
 with the preceding poetical ones. 
 
 [Various reasons may be given for the absence 
 of the acrostic in this chapter.* 1. There may 
 be something in the notion that the alphabetical 
 structure was not allowed to embarrass freedom 
 of thought and expression in prayer (Gerlach, 
 Adam Clarke). 2. We may suppose tlie writer 
 felt less need of the artificial restraint in con- 
 trolling his feelings and restricting their expres- 
 sion. It is not true that this Song " is of less 
 impassioned character " than the others, as 
 Wordsworth says, but it is true, as he further 
 says, that "the writer, being less agitated by/ 
 emotions, and having tranquillized himself by 
 
 * [The opinion of Bertholf, that the Prophet "either hiid 
 no more time to spend in the troublesome olioice of initial 
 words, or that he g:re\v tired of this trifling process and de- 
 liberately relinquished it," (quoted by Gerlach in his Intr. 
 p. X.), is sufficiently refuted, not only by its own irreverence, 
 but by what has been said in reference to the acrostic in Ad- 
 ditional Remarks to Intr. pp. 23, 24. — W. II. H.j 
 12 
 
 the utterance of his sorrow, and by meditations 
 on the attributes of God, did not need the help 
 of that artificial appliance to support and control 
 him." Besides, new restraints are imposed upon 
 the writer in this Song, which more than supply 
 any assistance derived from the alphabetical curb 
 in the preceding songs. The verses are reduced 
 from three and two members each, to a single 
 member, and this not only balanced by a cesura 
 or pause as in the other songs, but composed of 
 corresponding parallelisms of ideas and expres- 
 sions. To have added, to the production of these 
 distinct and emphatic parallelisms, the difiiculties 
 of the acrostic, could have g'erved no useful or 
 artistic purpose. 3. In the last fact referred to, 
 the introduction of parallelisms of thought and 
 sentiment, may be found the most satisfactory 
 reason for the absence of the acrostic. As long 
 as the parallelisms were merely rhythmical, as 
 in the first four songs, the alphabetical index 
 served a good purpose in rounding off and de- 
 fining the successive verses. Now it is no longer 
 needed. We find here then an argument in favor 
 of the theory advanced, in Additional Remarks 
 to the Introduction, p. 23, in reference to the 
 relation of the Acrostic to rhythmical parallel- 
 isms. 
 
 Is this chapter poetry or prose ? Dr. Naeoels- 
 bach says, " the acrostic is wanting because the 
 contents are in prose."* He certainly cannot 
 mean that the chapter is prose, because tli ; 
 
 * [We cannot misunderstand our author, for besides speak- 
 ing of this :'S a " prosaic chapter " and comparing it with tiie 
 preceding "poetiral chapters'" (see also Intr. j.)p. 3, 4, r>\ ".u-, 
 puts his new translation into good German prose — while he 
 has given us most lieautiful metrical translations of the other 
 four chapters. — ^V. H. H.J 
 
178 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 acrostic is wanting ; and yet unless he implies 
 this, he has not even suggested a reason for this 
 most extraordinary assertion. This chapter has 
 poetical characteristics, that the preceding chap- 
 ters do not possess; besides having all that they 
 do possess, except the acrostic, which in itself is 
 unpoetical. 1. It has that unfailing mark of 
 Hebrew poetry, of which the preceding chapters 
 are nearly destitute, parallelisms of thought, one 
 half the verse exactly and beautifully corres- 
 ponding in its sentiment and form of construc- 
 tion to the preceding half, and successive verses 
 connected by underlying analogies, comparisons, 
 or relations, such as parallelisms involve. 2. The 
 language is so unmistakably rhythmical as to 
 be almost metrical. The first line of each verse 
 never consists of more than four words, nor of 
 less than three, counting compound words as 
 one. The second line never consists of more 
 than three words (unless in two instances, where 
 
 vh ver. 12, and ''3 or W ver. 16, may be joined 
 to the word following themj, and if it have two 
 words only, those two are in tliat case invariably 
 long words. In this song, if anywhere in Hebrew 
 poetry, we can detect evidences of such metrical 
 feet as the Hebrew language was capable of. 3. 
 There is throughout the Song such assonance as 
 cannot be accidental, and could oidy be allowed 
 in poetry. The Song is full of rhymes. This may 
 not justify us in calling it a "strictly rhymed 
 Song" (as does Bellerman, Melr. d. Hebr., S. 220, 
 quoted by Gerlach), but it is certainly a result 
 of the evident regard to assonance in the choice 
 of words. Thus in this Song that is composed 
 of only 44 short lines, 1 occurs 55 times, and 44 
 times as final letter of words; D occurs 21 times 
 as final letter of words: out of the 134 words 
 the Song contains, 65, or only 2 less than one 
 half, end in either 1 or D- 24, or more than half 
 of the lines, end with 1, 17 end with -U, 9 end 
 with D- In 9 verses (1, 2, 4, 5, 11, 12, 15, 16, 
 17) both lines end with the same letter (or let- 
 ters) and vowel point. 28 lines end with the 
 same letter that terminates one (or both) of 
 tlie lines of the verse immediately preceding or 
 following. Other evidences of a studied asso- 
 nance are apparent : such as 2X, mjO, as ter- 
 minations of ver. 3 ; 1J''3"'p, ^y^^_, first words 
 in the lines of ver. 4 ; ''.J30 as first word in 
 second lines of verses 9, 10, making a parallel- 
 ism in sound as well as in sense ; lilJJU/, nOtJ/, in 
 
 T T -T 
 
 near relation and parallelism, vers. 14, 15, and 
 possibly an equivalent for failure of rhyme in 
 
 ver. 14 ; ^JS/j as last word in first lines of vers. 
 15, 17; etc. So obvious is the prevailing paro- 
 nomasia in this Song, tliat the remark has been 
 made, that the Song appears like 'the effort of a 
 youth playing with words' (quoted by Gerlach). 
 To the slur contained in tliis remark, it may be 
 replied, tliat no unskilled youth, even if capable 
 of choosing his words so artfully, could liave nr- 
 ranged them so as to give both harmony and 
 sense, and thus producs a poem equal in fervor, 
 force and beauty to this. But the fact that such 
 an insult could be offered (.o this Song, proves 
 *hat it is written in a style only adopted 
 in poetry. 4. In spirit as well as in form, this 
 
 chapter is poetry, and that of the highest order. 
 There is nothing prosaic about it, not even in th« 
 recital of hard facts and detailed incidents. As 
 the Song proceeds the lyre is tuned to higher 
 chords than even inspired minstrels often reach, 
 and vers. 14-19, are so exquisitely beautiful that 
 we cannot imagine anything to excel them in all 
 the Songs of Heaven and earth. I cannot repress 
 the expression of these sentiments and be a silent 
 instrument in giving to American readers, this 
 strange opinion of an eminent man, that this 
 chapter is a bit of prose writing, tacked on to a 
 splendid poem, by the poor expedient of its con- 
 taining twenty-two verses (though it is something 
 new to write prose in verses). Were I more dif- 
 fident of my own judgment, I might take refuge 
 umler the shadow of Dean Milman, who in culling 
 from the Lamentations what he regards as speci- 
 mens of "the deepest pathos of poetry," gives 
 us a metrical translation of nearly the whole of 
 the 5th chapter (14 out of the 22 verses), while 
 he selects only three verses from chap, i., eight 
 verses from chap, ii,, three verses from chap, iv., 
 and none fromchap. iii. It is to be inferred that 
 in his judgment, the fifth Song excels in its poetry 
 the four Songs that precede it. I agree with 
 him. 
 
 That the only connection of this chapter with 
 the preceding four chapters is found in the cor- 
 responding number of its verses, without which 
 it might be regarded as a supplement to those 
 chapters, but not as an integral part of the Poem, 
 is an opinion that will not sustain examination. 
 1. It is, as we have seen, lyrical in its structure, 
 and thus assimilated to the preceding Songs. 2. 
 The Poem could not end with the fourth cliapter. 
 Such an ending were too painfully abrupt. Even 
 as it is, the burden of Edom seems to be intruded 
 at that place, and we only comprehend it, when 
 we know that it was Jeremiah's habit to repre- 
 sent the security of the church of God, by de- 
 picting the destruction of its enemies. But to 
 end the Poem with that threat against Edom, 
 would seem to be impossible. Something more 
 is needed, and that something is just what we 
 have in the prayer of chap. v. 3. The only way 
 to account for the omission of the usual prayer 
 (see i., ii., iii.) at the end of the 4th Song, is 
 by the fact that its omission was to be more than 
 supplied by the 5th Song. Here is the groove 
 into which the fifth Song is dovetailed so securely, 
 that we cannot break the connection, without 
 marring the harmony and completeness of the 
 whole poem. 4. The structure of this last Song, 
 gives the last needed touch to the manifest unity 
 of the whole poem. The preceding chapters may 
 be regarded as composing a poem not unlike the 
 modern ode, in which great liberties in the 
 versification are allowed. But the Ode, com- 
 plete in its main parts, is wound up at last with 
 a Hymn of prayer to God, constructed according 
 to the strictest rules of lyrical poetry, metrical 
 and harmonious, and forming an apt conclusion 
 because it recites all that has been before said, 
 briefly and forcibly, — sums up, as it were, the 
 whole case, and leaves it in the hands of God. 
 Finally Dr. Naegelsbach's beautiful fiction of 
 a crescendo and a decrescendo movement, does not 
 need the flattening out of the Poem into a piece of 
 prose writing, attached to what precedes only bj 
 
CHAP. V. 2-10. 
 
 173 
 
 the number of its verses. It is enough that the I plaintive lyre pours forth a final strain of im- 
 decrescendo movement, in the music of the Poem, passioned, yet melting and delicious harmony.—. 
 is arrested at the close, and the Poet's most W. H. H.] 
 
 V. 1. 
 1 Remember, O Lord, -what is come upon us : consider and behold our reproach. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 1. — I-" 13?. See Is. xxxviii. 3; Mic. vi. 5 ; Job iv. 7.— £3''3n- See i. 11. [Blatnet : " Forty-one MSS. and fout 
 : T • - 
 
 Editions read with the Masora DtO'jn, with the n paragogic." Henderson: "The H thus added to the Imperative, ex- 
 
 T ■ - 
 presses the emotion of ardent desire on the part of the speaker."] — ^jri3in. See iii. 30 ; Ps. Ixxiv. 22; Ixxxix. 51. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Ver. 1. Remember, O LORD, what is 
 come upon us, — Rememhpr, Jehovah, what has 
 befallen m, — consider and behold — look and 
 sec — our reproach. — [The word translated con- 
 sider (see i. 11), when followed by DN"!, to see, 
 means to direct attention to a thing in order to 
 see it. Blayney and Noyes translate, Look 
 
 doivn and see — which gives the sense, but the 
 word does not express direction, but the intensity 
 of looking. — W. H. H.] This first verse consti- 
 tutes the introduction. It contains the prayer, 
 that Jehovah would regard the affliction and re- 
 proach fallen on Zion[the people], some features 
 of which the Poet recounts in what follows. The 
 Poet presents himself before God, as it were, and 
 all that follows is to be regarded as addressed to 
 God. 
 
 V. 2-10. 
 
 2, 3 Our inheritance is turned to strangers, our houses to aliens. We are orphans 
 
 4 and fatherless, our mothers are as widows. We have drunken our water for money; 
 
 5 our wood is sold unto us. Our necks are under persecution : we labour, and have 
 
 6 no rest. We have given the hand to the Egyptians, and to the Assyrians, to be 
 
 7 satisfied with bread. Our fathers have sinned, and are not : and we have borne 
 
 8 their iniquities. Servants have ruled over us : there is uoue that doth deliver us 
 
 9 out of their hand. We gat our bread with the peril of our lives, because of the 
 10 sword of the wilderness. Our skin was black like an oven, because of the terrible 
 
 famine. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 2. — nbn J, frequent in Jeremiah, ii. 7 ; iii. 19 ; xii. 7-9, etc. — ^DHJ, see i. 20 ; iv. 6. Jeremiah uses in this sense 
 JD J) ^i- 12. This word represents the transfer of property to another owner, in Is. Ix. 5 also. — D''^ T Jeremiah uses frequently, 
 
 -T "T 
 
 ii. 25 ; iii. 13; v. 19, etc. — D'^DJ Jeremiah uses only once, in the fem., n^"UJ \2^, "• 21. 
 • : T T • : T I V v 
 
 Ver. 3. — DlH', Jer. v. 28 ; vii. 6, etc. : in Lamentations only here. — ^X PN- See Is. xlvii. 1 ; Jer. ii. 32 ; my (?r., §106, 
 
 T T I •■ 
 
 3. [r J<=ohne, witlwut, Naegels. Gr.] The K'ri, VXI is unnecessary. 
 
 Ver. 4.— :| yD''0, Jer. vi. 7 ; xlvi. 7 ; I. 38.— flpD, Jer. vi. 30, eJc— D"'^JT, Jer. v. 14 ; vii. 18, «te.— TTIO, Jer. xv. 13.— 
 ^N3"- EWA.LD translates, our wood is sold for silver. He also takes Xi3 in tl^e sense of the Latin vtneo, venire. But I d« 
 rot think that S?13 is ever used in this sense. At the most, only 1 Kings s. 14 could be cited, where the word is used with 
 reference to the revenues. 
 
 Ver. 5. — INiy, see i. 14. — HTT, Jer. xix. 18; Lam. i. 6: in the sense of driving, cliasing, the word is not elsewhere found 
 In Jeremiah. [It is doubtful if that is its sense here.— W. H. H.] — ^y, Jer. xlv. 3, which place is very closely allied in 
 •ense to our place here, Ii. 58. — nj^D- The Hophal is found only here : Jeremiah uses only the Hiphil n'in> xiv. 9 ; xxviL 
 
 11 ; xlUi. 6. 
 
 Ver. 6. D''^VO and TItJ'X are to be taken as Ace. localis, in answer to the question whither? See my Gr., J 70, 6. 
 
 JThere is no necessity of supposing an ellipsis of the preposition 7, as Henderson ; nor any grammatical reason for tran» 
 lating, Egypt, O Assyria, as Blayney does, diverting the prayer from God to these heathen nations.— W. H. H.]— _j?3ijr, 
 
 ■ee iii. 30. 
 
 Ver. 7. OyN- Four times in this chapter, the Masorites would read 1, uhere it is wanting in tl»' Xt, rerg. 3, 5, 7 
 
180 
 
 THE LV'IENTATIONS OP JEREMIAH. 
 
 tvxice. But the author generally uses Vav sparingly. Only once is the second clause of the verse begun with V In thit 
 ▼erse, an error might arise from its use. If it were DJ' XI, some would be led to understand their non-existence, as the con- 
 sequence of their sinning. See Jer. x. 20. But this cannot be the author's meaning; for he immediately asserts that th» 
 generation now living has to bear the punishment. Their being no longer in existence, therefore, is the simple result of 
 the course of nature. — SjD Jeremiah never uses. It represents bearing the burden of sin, Is. liii. 4, 11 ; comp. xlvi. 4, 7. — 
 
 - T 
 
 ?ij?, see ii. 14. 
 
 Yer. 8. — bti'O, Jer. xxii. 30 ; xxx. 21, etc. — p'lQ, see Gen. xxvii. 40 ; Ps. vii.3 ; cxxxvi. 24 ; Jeremiah never uses the wuid, 
 
 neither does it occur again in the Lamentations. 
 
 Ver. 9.— IJiySJS (3 pretii, see my Gr., g 112, 5 a). See i. 11 ; 2 Sam. xxiii. 17 ; 1 Chron. xi. 19.— J{'3n, see i. 21. [W» 
 have the future here, as the historical imperfect, implying the recurrence of what is related.— W. H. H.]— Qn 7, i. H.— 
 *131iDn 31 n, which can only indicate the robber tribes of the desert (Gen. xvi. 12), is found only here. [Calvin translates 
 3"in, drought, and wonders that any one ever thought of calling it sword. It may have the meaning of drought in Dent, 
 xxviii. 22, though even there E. V. has sword. lu this verse, all the Versions, and commentators generally, translate sword. 
 — W. II. H.] 
 
 Ver. 10. — '^'|22 occurs only in Niphal, and besides here only in three places. Gen. xliii. 30; 1 Kings iii. 26; Hos. xi. 8. 
 
 The sense is calef actum, adustum esse (see lon, i- 20; ii. 11). The plural shows that ^^^^ is regarded collectively. [It also 
 
 - T 
 
 shows the preference in this Song for termination in V Yet, " fifty-eight MSS., and the Soncin. Bible read lyil^ in the 
 plural " (Henderson).- W.H. H.]— Ilj;, see iv. 8.— "^^Ijp, see Hos. vii. 6, 7, is not found in Jeremiah, [nor any equivalent 
 for it.— W. H. H.]— niiJ^ST, Kstus vehemens, Jeremiah never uses. It is found, besides here, only in Ps. cxix. 53 ; xi. 6. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 [Vers. 2-10 describe the distressed condition 
 «f the people generally, and especially the suf- 
 ferings caused by deticiency in the necessaries 
 of life. Vers. 2, 3, describe their disinherited 
 and bereaved condition. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 2. Our inheritance is turned to 
 strangers, our houses to aliens — foreigners. 
 [Calvin : " The land had been promised to 
 Abraham four hundred years, before his chil- 
 dren possessed it ; we know that this promise had 
 been often repeated, 'This land shall be to you 
 for an inheritance.' . . . No land has ever been 
 given to men in so singular a way as the land of 
 Canaan to the posterity of Abraham. As, then, 
 this inheritance had been for so many ages pos- 
 sessed by the chosen people, Jeremiah does not 
 without reason complain that it was turned over 
 to aliens."~\ — Our houses to aliens. Many ex- 
 positors (Vaiuingkr for instance) understand 
 from the second clause of this verse, that not all 
 the houses of Jerusalem had been destroyed, but 
 those which still remained were at the disposal 
 of the Chaldeans; which is the same as saying 
 that they dwelt in them. They appeal to 2 
 Chron. xxxvi. 19, where the de.struction of the 
 palaces only is spoken of. Although in Jer. Iii. 
 13; 2 Kings xxv. 9, it is expressly said that all 
 the houses of Jerusalem, jvere destroyed, yet, they say, 
 this is to be regarded as merely a rhetorical hyper- 
 bole, since elsewhere the houses of the great [the 
 nobility] are alone specified. Compare Jer. Iii. 13. 
 We have, however, no evidence that the Chalde- 
 ans inhabited Jerusalem after its destruction ; 
 and Nehemiah (ii. 3) mourns that Jerusalem is 
 nmn, desolate, and its gates burned with fire. 
 tVhen it is said here that the houses were given 
 up to the Chaldeans, this can only mean that they 
 disposed of them as they pleased. In fact, they 
 destroyed the bouses, but carried away the mov- 
 able property found in them as booty. Although 
 the houses and their contents could be designated 
 as an inheritance, yet by n'lnj, inheritance, which 
 
 is here distinguished from the houses, the land is 
 especially intended (see Lev. xx. 24; Num. xvi. 
 14; xxxvi. 7-9; Jos. xiii. 23 ; etc.). We may say, 
 
 therefore, that TXl n J, inheritance, and D^"^3, 
 
 ' T-:|-' ' ■ T 
 
 houses, are related to each other substantially as 
 fixed and movable property. 
 
 Ver. 3. We are orphans and fatherless — 
 
 2ve have become orphans, fatherless \_without a father, 
 Calvin, Blayney, Boothroyd, Noyes, Gerlach] 
 — and our mothers are as -widow^s. That 
 the first words cannot be understood exclusively 
 of the loss of their own fathers, is evident from 
 the expression as widows. Pareau is of the opi- 
 nion that ividoivs and orjoAaws indicate, in a gene- 
 ral way only, as a proverbial formula, tritissimam 
 sortem [a very sad lot], and appeals to Is. i. 17 ; 
 Ps. xciv. 6 ; James i. 27. But in all those places, 
 widows and orphans in the strict sense of the 
 terms, are to be understood. Thenius under- 
 stands by the mothers, the wives of the King, 
 who were with the little company among whom 
 our song originated. But even if we allow, that 
 as some of the Princesses of the royal family, 
 according to Jer. xli. 10, escaped transportation, 
 so also may some of the wives of the royal 
 harem, yet we cannot suppose that the Poet in- 
 dicated these as the mothers of himself and his 
 companions, because they were not, in fact, their 
 mothers, nor was it customary to call them so. 
 Ewald refers orphans and fatherless to the loss of 
 the sovereign (the father of his country, ii. 9; 
 iv. 20) and of the theocracy, but widoirs to tli» 
 communities and cities (i. 1). This is witliout 
 doubt correct, as far as this, that all the Isiael- 
 ites had, in this respect, become fatherless and 
 their mothers widows. But why might not the 
 Poet, at the same time, have alluded to the fact, 
 that in the prevailing confusion most of the 
 mothers could not certainly know whether their 
 husbands were dead or alive, and therefore it 
 could be correctly said of them that they were 
 "as widows" (seei. 1)? I believe, therefore, 
 that ver. 3 einV)races every species of orphan- 
 age that might liave existed at tliat time. [There 
 were so many orphans and mothers separated 
 
CHAP. V. 2-10. 
 
 181 
 
 from their husbands among the people, that a 
 Poet might well exclaim. Behold in us a people 
 composed of fatherless orphans, whose mothers 
 are as widows! But the particle of comparison 
 attached to the last word, as widows, suggests 
 the probability that the whole verse is intended 
 metaphorically. AVe are like fatherless orphans 
 and our mothers like widows. This is Gerlach's 
 explanation. — W. H. H.] 
 
 [Vers. 4-10 relate to the general distress occa- 
 fiioned by the want of the necessaries of life and 
 the oppression of their masters. — W. H. II.] 
 
 Ver. 4. "We have drunken our w^ater for 
 money; our -wood is sold unto us (marg. 
 coincih for price unto us). Our wafer we drink for 
 money ; our wood comes to us for payment. That 
 the want of water before the capture of the city 
 is not here intended, is evident from the expres- 
 sions our water, our wood ; for the prominence 
 of this idea can only signify that the .Jews were 
 obliged to buy from their enemies the wood and 
 water that were rightly their own; but this could 
 have been the case only after the capture of the 
 city. We perceive from the description, that the 
 companies of the captives, in all cases narrowly 
 watched, were not at liberty to go, at their own 
 pleasure, to bring wood and water. But they 
 were furnished, either with no provisions at all, 
 or in insufiScient quantities, so thai in order to 
 secure the necessaries of life, they were obliged 
 to apply to their guards, who made them pay 
 dearly f<jr the services rendered them. It appears 
 further from this passage, that the Poet has here 
 in his eye that period of the captivity when the 
 captives were still in their own land, else he 
 could not say "oi/r water, our wood." There 
 seems to be a rhetorical reason for the use of the 
 perfect (ipni^) in the first clause, and of the 
 imperfect (^XJ") in the second. For, grammati- 
 cally considered, either the perfect or imperfect 
 should be used both times, since the two acts are 
 entirely homogeneous. But the Poet wished to 
 bring variety into his period, perhaps also to 
 avoid the clashing together of two tone-syllables, 
 which would have liappeiied, if it had been 
 written 1N3. He could introduce this variety, 
 since the limit between these two verbal forms is 
 a fluctuating one, determined by the subjective 
 conception of the speaker. For, in many cases, 
 the same action can be regarded as already com- 
 pleted and as still in progress. See for example 
 
 ^Xi3r> yxo (Jos. ix. 8) and DnX3 yXO (Gen. xlii. 
 7), iny Gr. §g 84, 87. So here the drinking of 
 water for money is represented by lypK' as some- 
 thing accomplished, being constituted by many 
 acts of drinking, but by ^n5' the fetching of the 
 wood is represented as something not yet finished, 
 something still continuing. We are at liberty to 
 translate both tenses, so far as they are con- 
 cerned, by the present or by the preterit. The 
 context shows which the Poet intends. He evi- 
 dently is describing the journej' of the captives 
 going into exile. But nothing indicates that he 
 looks back upon it as already accomplished, that 
 he would represent it as already terminated in 
 the land of exile. Consequently, we are obliged 
 to translate all the tenses, which refer to differ- 
 
 ent incidents of the journey, in the present. 
 [There is a studied effort in this Song, as shown 
 in the preliminary note to this chapter, to multiply 
 words ending in 1, ^J, and we may add in M-^ 
 In the expressions "■Our water," '■^ our wood," 
 the pronoun is added merely, if we may so say, 
 for the sake of the rhyme, or, more correctly, 
 the assonance, just as in ver. 9 ho says, " our 
 bread." The writer could legitimately gratify 
 the ear by this expedient, for what they bought 
 and used certainly became their own. It is ob- 
 vious, therefore, that the meaning of the verse 
 can not turn on the use of the word our. If this 
 liad been intended to be emphatic, and to repre- 
 sent the water and the wood as their property 
 before they bought it, then this verse should 
 have immediately followed ver. 2, where the 
 transfer of their property to new owners is re- 
 presented. Otherwise, the third verse intrudes 
 a new idea between two thoughts that are closely 
 related, the loss of their inheritance and houses, 
 and the necessity of purchasing what had been 
 tlioir own property. If, on the other hand, we 
 take our text as a simple statement of the fact 
 that they were obliged to purchase such com- 
 mon necessaries of life as water and wood, we 
 are enabled to translate the preterit verb in the 
 past indefinite time. The Prophet is by no means 
 describing the incidents of the journey of the 
 exiles from their own land. He is enumerating 
 and heaping together en masse the various features 
 of sorrow and suffering experienced by the un- 
 happy people, without particular reference either 
 to the time or place of their happening. Among 
 other things that had happened was their having 
 to pay money for the watei they drank: and he 
 uses the preterit tense, We have drunken our zvater 
 for money, — this is among the things that had 
 happened, perhaps once only, perhaps oftener ; 
 but there was another hardsliip of more frequent 
 occurrence, one often repeated, and that may 
 have continued down to the time when he wrote, 
 and this he expresses, as the Hebrew so con- 
 stantly expresses the recurrence of events even 
 after they are past, by the future form of the 
 verb, which we may render as an historical im- 
 perfect — our wood came to us, or was coming, that 
 is, it came in that way only, for a price, or we 
 may render it as a present — j7 comes still onlyybr 
 pay.—Vf. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 5. Our necks are under persecution 
 (marg. On otir 7iecks are we persecuted); we labor 
 and have no rest. We are driven headlong 
 [Ueber Hals und Kopf werden wir gejagt, lit. 
 over neck and head [over head and ears, as we say 
 in English) are we driven'\ ; are we tired, rest is not 
 
 permittedus. The Septuagint connects 'J"|^i<i^ 7^. 
 upon our necks, with what precedes, fiAa tjfiuv iv 
 (iXXdypaTt yX-dev etvc tov Tpaxrj^.ov ijiiuv, our wood 
 in exchange for our money came upon our neck. So 
 also the Arabic version. The Syriac closes ver. 
 
 4 with "I'TIDS. and refers ^S^b' to what follows, 
 
 ... ^ 7 
 
 SO that it also translates venerunt super collum 
 nostrum, they came upon our neck, where either 
 ligna, wood, or hostes, the enemy, may be regarded 
 as the subject. Among the moderns, Aben-Ezr.a. 
 and J. D.w. Mich.velis also connect the phras» 
 upon our necks with what precedes. The latter 
 
182 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 gives the sense thus, ligna nostra pretio empta cer- 
 vicibus noslris imposita in urbem importantur, our 
 wood bought with a price and laid upon our 
 necks is carried into the city. The explanation 
 of the Sjriac produces a very harsh zeugma in 
 ver. 4, renders the following sentence unintelli- 
 gible, and expresses a thought that may be termed 
 at least unnecessary. The objections to the 
 other versions are as follows. 1. Tn03,/o;' />«?/, 
 ver. 4 must be taken, either as dependent on a 
 verb to be supplied [emta), or as belonging to 
 1X3', in the vei*y unsuitable sense, that the Jews 
 were paid for carrying the wood. 2. The sym- 
 metrical proportions of the verses are destroyed; 
 ver. 4 is too long, ver. 5 too short. We will then 
 follow the Masoretic division of the verses. But 
 as thus arranged, this verse has undergone 
 various interpretations. Pareau translates super 
 cervicibus nostris insessores patimnr, we bear sitters 
 [riders'\ upon our necks. But ?J3'[T"1J cannot mean 
 we are ridden, or we carry riders. As little can it mean 
 naturally, we bear persecutor^ or oppressors, which 
 would correspond with Pareau's idea, only with- 
 out a figure. Others (Raschi, De Wette, Ewald, 
 1st ed., Meyer, Vaihinger, Enqelhardt) trans- 
 late on our necks the yoke, or the yoke on the neck 
 are we persecuted. But as Thenius has remarked, 
 the yoke here is a superadiled idea entirely ar- 
 bitrary. [Blaynet reads 7J?, yoke, instead of 
 the preposition '7^, upon. But we must then, as 
 he does, take the verb in a sense it cannot have 
 of being burtliened with. With the yoke of our necks 
 are we contimmlly burthejied ; or, as Boothroyd 
 does, supply the preposition on ami the verb is, 
 and make an independent proposition of the first 
 two words. The yoke is on our necks, we are pur- 
 sued; or, as Noyes does, supply two preposi- 
 tions. With the yoke upon our necks, we are driven. 
 
 Henderson, without changing 7i? into i'^, thinks 
 that upon our necks ice are persecuted expresses 
 " elliptically the great hardship to which the 
 Jews were reduced in being compelled as cap- 
 tives to bear a heavy yoke on their necks;" and 
 translates. We are persecuted with a yoke on our 
 necks. So William Lowth seems to understand 
 the text and refers to Deut. xxviii. 48. " We 
 are driven to our work like the bullock that has 
 a yoke about his neck" (Adam Clarke). — W. 
 H. H.] AH these explanations fail in this that 
 they let 7j^ depend, not immediately on ^JS'H'^J, 
 but very unnecessarily on an entirely different 
 idea supposed to be concealed therein. Thenius 
 and Ewald (2d ed.) have perceived the right 
 sense, when they translate, on the neck were we 
 pursued (so Ewald: Thenius expresses the 
 same sense by the words, they pursued us over 
 our necks, i. e. since they are ever close behind 
 us). I translate. We are driven on over our necks, 
 that is to say, so that the driving goes over our 
 necks onwards — and this idea corresponds ex- 
 actly with our German phrase, " iiber Hals uiid 
 Kopf " [lit. over neck and head, i. e. headlong]. 
 Luther: "iiber Hals." [In full: Man treibt 
 ans iiber Hals."! Besides, HTl cannot be taken 
 
 i- T 
 
 in tF>e sense of pursuing, for not fugitives, but 
 captives are here spoken of, who are already in 
 
 the hands of the enemies and are driven onward 
 without mercy. This appears plainly from vex-s. 
 5, 8. The meaning to drive, to chase, undoubt- 
 edly lies in the root Hll (see the kindred roots 
 n^"^' ^^^' ^?^)> ^^^ is as plain as daylight in 
 
 such places as Lev. xxvi. 36 (the sound of a 
 falling leaf shall chase them). Job xxx. 15; Is. 
 xvii. 13. [It would be a relief to accepl Dr. 
 Naegelsbach's simple explanation, and trans- 
 late. They drove us, or we were driven headlong, 
 or as we would say in our colloquial English, 
 heels over head, but there is no evidence that the 
 Hebrew words are used in an}' such colloquial 
 sense. The next best thing is to adopt the trans- 
 lation of Maurer, Thenius, Ewald, Owen and 
 (jrERLACH, which Dr. Naecelsbach also approves 
 of. On our necks were ive pursued, i. e. our pur- 
 suers followed U3 so closely as to be, as it were, 
 on our necks. -'We are hunted by pursuers 
 who are ever hanging over our neck" (Words- 
 worth). The objection to taking the verb in the 
 sense of pursuing, on the ground that the people 
 are here considered as captives and nol fugitives, 
 grows out of the incorrect interpretation of ver. 
 4, and involves an entire misconception of the 
 intention of this Song. It is not the design of 
 the Prophet to give a detailed account of suc- 
 cessive and related events, but to heap up to- 
 gether, in one rapid and vehement recapitula- 
 tion, all the wrongs, indignities and sufferings 
 the people had endured, without reference to 
 times or places. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 6. Whilst the Poet describes the onward 
 march of the larger part of the people to the land 
 of banishment, he is reminded that the people 
 are, by this means, still more widely separated 
 and torn asunder; for one part, by far the smaller 
 part, has been compelled to turn southwards to- 
 wards Egypt. [This verse confirms the opinion 
 that the Prophet is not relating successive events 
 iu the order of their occurrence and in their re- 
 lations to each other; but is stating independent 
 facts and instances, all of which contribute to 
 present to God an appeal for pity and mercy. 
 There is no close connection, therefore, between 
 vers. 5, 6, such as Owen and Gerlach would 
 find, when they say that ver. 6 relates wliat they 
 did when so closely pursued. According to Dr. 
 Naegelsbach's interpretation, that ver. 5 refers 
 to the Jews on their way to Babylonia, driven 
 before their captors, the connection of ver. 6 is 
 impossible. While they were so closely pur- 
 sued that their pursuers were on their necks, did 
 even a small part of them miraculously escape 
 and flee to Egypt? Dr. Naegelsbach does not 
 mean to assert tliis; but his theory of interpre- 
 tation would seem to demand it. — W. H. H.]^ 
 "We have given the hand to the Egyp- 
 tians, and to the Assyrians to be satisfied 
 ■with bread, — Towards Egypt stretched we the 
 hand, — Towards Assyria, — in order to be satisfied 
 with bread. To stretch out the hand can mean 
 here only, to stretch out the hand as a suppliant; 
 see Jer. 1. 15; 1 Chron. xxix. 24. [Calvin: 
 "To give the hand, is explained in three ways: 
 some say that it means humbly to ask; others, 
 to make an agreement ; and otliers, to extend it 
 in token of misery, as he who cannot ask for 
 help, intimates his wants by extending his hand. 
 
CHAP. V. 2-10. 
 
 l»;J 
 
 But the Prophet seems simply to mean that the 
 people were so distressed by want, that they 
 begged bread."] But in what sense did the .Jews 
 stretch out the hand to Assyria? They had sub- 
 mitted to this great power, not willingly, as they 
 had thrown themselves into the arms of the 
 Egyptians, but by compulsion. Yet they must, 
 if they would live, stretch out their suppliant 
 hand, to receive a morsel of bread from the hand 
 of Assyria bestowing it upon them. But what 
 power is intended by Assyria? It has been un- 
 derstood of Assyria strictly speaking, which car- 
 ried the ten tribes into exile. But it would be 
 strange, indeed, if the Poet here overlooked the 
 Babylonish exile. That he says Assur, and not 
 Babel, may be explained on the ground that he 
 has in mind the Assyrian, as well as the Baby- 
 lonish captivity. While Babel never stands for 
 Assur and Babel, the name Assur is so used as 
 to embrace both countries; see 2 Kings xvii. 24; 
 xviii. 11: xxiii. 29; 2 Chron. xxxiii. 11. The 
 brief words of our text exhibit also the fact, that 
 Israel no longer existed as a nation, but was en- 
 tirely given over to the power of the kingdoms 
 of this world, oa whose favor its very life de- 
 pended ; and, while the smaller part found itself 
 in the power of Egypt, the larger part, which 
 included both Israel, carried away into Assyrian 
 exile, and Judah, deported to Babylon, is sub- 
 ject to Assur, — to Assur in the widest sense of 
 the term, understanding thereby, not only Assy- 
 ria in the strict sense, but Babylon also. See 
 also Jer. ii. 18. [Noyes is of the opinion that 
 giving the hand, imports submission, as in Jer. 1. 
 15; to stretch out the hand to be bound, as it 
 were. Thus, he remarks, " in 2 Chron. xxx. 8, 
 what is translated in the common version yield 
 yourselves unto the Lord, is in the original give the 
 hand to the Lord." The context here, never- 
 theless, favors the idea that the Jews were re- 
 duced in many instances to abject beggary, and 
 entire dependence for the necessaries of life on 
 these heathen nations, the greatest enemies their 
 country had.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 7. Our fathers have sinned and are 
 not: and vye have borne their iniquities. 
 — Our fathers have .tinned: they are not; we bear 
 their sins. [There is no sufficient reason for 
 rendering the last verb as a present. The Eng- 
 lish version is more literal. — W. H. H.] Com- 
 paring this verse with ver. 16, a certain parallel- 
 ism is observable. In both the sins of the people 
 are asserted to be the cause of the calamities 
 previously described. But ver. 7 says, Our fa- 
 thers have sinned and we bear their guilt. Ver. 
 16, on the contrary says, Woe to us, we have 
 sinned. Here, as in i. 5, 8, 9, 14, 18; ii. 14; iii. 
 42; iv. 6, 12-14, the description of calamities 
 endured constitute a principal feature in the con- 
 fession of sin. As one paragraph ends with ver. 
 7, and another with ver. 16, ver. 8 begins a new 
 paragraph. [ This division separates verses 
 closely allied. The subject down to ver. 10 is 
 chiefly related to sufferings connected with the 
 want of the necessaries of life. With ver. 11 
 begins a description of individual instances of 
 outrage and cruelty (vers. 11-14), followed by a 
 description of the effects of all these calamities, 
 public and private, on the theocratic people who 
 offer the prayer. Ver. IG is as intimately con- 
 
 nected with what follows, as with what precedes 
 it. — W. H. H.] There is at least some truth in 
 the assertion made in ver. 7. For the great ca- 
 tastrophe had been brought about, not only by 
 the guilt of the last generation, but also by that 
 of previous generations (Jer. iii. 25; xv. 4; xvi, 
 11, 12). But ver. 7, without ver. 16, would con- 
 tain only a partial view of the truth. The two 
 verses complete each other. [Wordsworth : 
 " The sins of their forefathers were visited upon 
 them, because they themselves had sinned, as 
 they themselves confess. . . . There is, there- 
 fore, no reason for supposing, with some, that 
 these words could not have been written by Jere- 
 miah, being at variance with the doctrine ia 
 Jer. xxxi. 29."] — And are not (QJ''.|?*, without 
 ], see Gk. notes above; they are not.) These 
 words connect themselves rather with what fol- 
 lows, than with what precedes. Our fathers have 
 sinned. Whilst tliey are no more, loe bear their sins. 
 
 Ver. 8. Servants have ruled over us : 
 there is none that doth deliver us out of 
 their hands. — \_None delivered from, their hands. '\ 
 Who are these servants? Satraps are suggested. 
 So say those who understand ver. 5 of the resi- 
 dence of a part of the people in Palestine or 
 elsewhere. But we see from ver. 5, that the 
 subject of discourse is the march of the actually 
 exiled hosts. Satraps, itis true, are the king's ser- 
 vants, but they are not merely servants, they are 
 not slaves. That men of distinguished descent and 
 high rank should stand under Satraps was a re- 
 proach, when considered in a theocratic point of 
 view, but not to be regarded as a matter of suf- 
 ficient importance to be mentioned in this place. 
 Besides, in fact Gedaliah ruled in Judea, himself 
 a Jew and, according to the testimony of Jere- 
 miah (xl. 7-12), a well-disposed man. But that 
 real slaves were employed for overseers and 
 drivers of the marching captives, this was cer- 
 tainly in the highest degree hard and likewise 
 disgraceful. [This again is to be regarded as 
 one feature of the great variety of sufferings 
 that befell the people. It is not necessary to 
 suppose that the whole people were at any time 
 under the lordship of slaves or under-servants. 
 It is not necessary to suppose an exclusive re- 
 ference to the bands of captives that were driven 
 to Babylonia. It is enough that in their degraded 
 state it often happened that they had to submit 
 to domineering and harsh treatment from men 
 that were themselves menials. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 9. We gat our bread vrith — at — the 
 peril of our lives, because of the sword 
 of the wilderness. Rosenmueller refers 
 this verse to the dangers which the corn-trans- 
 ports out of Egypt may have had to encounter in 
 the wilderness. But is it supposable that corn 
 was brought from Egypt, when the larger part 
 of the people had been led away to Babylon, 
 and the smaller part had themselves fled to 
 Egypt? EwALi), on the other hand, finds in 
 these words " a remarkable indication, that most 
 of the fugitives in Egypt dwelt at the nortli- 
 eastern border close to the desert," and so were 
 compelled "to wring their bread from the desert 
 and its robbers." But when in the world was 
 bread brought from the desert, even by tiiuse 
 dwelling on the borders of Egypt, and not from 
 
184 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 the interior of the country ? Thenius presumes 
 that this Song was written amid the circum- 
 stances of one of those small companies that 
 remained in Palestine and were scattered about 
 in that land. These, falling in on their pas- 
 ture-grounds with the warlike tribes sojourn- 
 ing among them, would be compelled to get their 
 Bubsistence by fighting for it. But that suppo- 
 sition is confirmed neither by the history (ob- 
 serve Jer. xlii. 1, "all the people," etc.), nor by 
 the contents of our Song (coiupare ver. 8 espe- 
 cially, with the opinion of Thenius, that the 
 little company, among whom the Song was writ- 
 ten, preferred liberty in poverty, to dependence 
 in prosperity, ver. 6). The view of Vaihinger 
 rests on the same opinion, and differs from that 
 of Thenius only in this, that he understands the 
 bringing of bread to refer to merchant travellers 
 who were in peril from Bedouin robbers. I am 
 of the opinion, that the expedition here indicated, 
 was an incident belonging to the experience of 
 those Israelites who had not been led away to 
 Babylon, and especially of those who had fled to 
 Egypt. It is allowable to suppose, both from 
 general reasons and particularly from ver. 6, 
 that this one of the two parts of the people is 
 intended. Much is touched upon in the Song, 
 that happened to all in common (vers. 2, 3, 7, 
 10-12) ; much that only befell those who suffered 
 captivity (vers. 4, 5, 8) ; here (ver. 9) we have 
 a description that suits only the condition of 
 those fugitives to Egypt, who yet retained their 
 freedom. But I refer the verse, not as Ewald 
 to those already settled in Egypt, but to events 
 and circumstances preceding their settlement. 
 According to Jeremiah xli. 8, ten men bought 
 their lives of Ishmael, the murderer of Gedaliah, 
 at tlie price of provisions which they had hidden. 
 From this we see that provisions were scarce and 
 
 that there were bands of robbers who hunted for 
 them. Is it not then in the highest degree pro- 
 bable, that the crowd which fled to Egypt (Jer. 
 xli. 16-18), both while they wene still in Pales 
 tine, and frequently when they were in the de- 
 sert, could obtain what was necessary for sub- 
 sistence only at the peril of their lives ? — [We 
 gat our bread. Here again we have a future 
 tense, NOJ ; intimating the frequent recurrence, 
 and doubtless the continuance, at the time of 
 writing, of this peril. — VV. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 10. Our skin ■was black like an 
 oven. [So Broughton, Calvin and Hender- 
 son. See Ps. Ixviii. 13.] Our skin is burnt [Aas 
 been burnt'\ like an oven. [This sense is the one 
 generally adopted, on the ground that it is more 
 consistent with the effects of famine, and more 
 congenial with the derivation and use of the 
 Hebrew word. Blatney and Notes translate 
 the verb parched.— W. H. H.]. The effect of 
 hunger on the skin is compared to that of heat 
 on the walls of the oven. Like these, that has 
 become hot, dry, hard, cracked. There was 
 hunger enough with the two parts of the people, 
 who stretched out their hands, one to As-yria, 
 the other to Egypt, until the one had arrived in 
 Assyria and the other in Egypt. — Because of 
 the terrible (marg. terrors, or .'storms of) 
 famine, — because of the heat (or hotness. Gluten) 
 of hunger. [Because of the 6Mrn«>!^ (Broughton) 
 or burnings (Calvin, Notes). Gerlach trans- 
 lates the word raging, or fury (Wiithen), and so 
 it is rendered by Alexander (in Ps. xi. 6 ; cxix. 
 53, the only other places where the word occurs), 
 who remarks, that "no English word is strong 
 enough to represent the Hebrew except rage or 
 fury." Blatnet translates stormy blasts of hun- 
 ger, and Henderson the hot blasts of famine. — 
 W. H. H.] 
 
 V. 11-13. 
 
 11 They ravished the women in Zion, and the maids in the cities of Judah. 
 12, 13 Princes are hanged by their hand : the faces of elders were not honoured. They 
 took the young men to grind, and the children fell under the wood. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver.ll.— njy, see iii. 33.— miiT ^^V, see Jer. i. 15 ; iv. 16 ; ix. 10 ; and elsewhere very frequently. 
 T • T ; •• T 
 
 Ver. 12.— n^p is found nowhere in Jeremiah.— 1171 Jeremiah never uses ; see Lev. xix. 15, 32 ; Ex. xxiii. 3. 
 
 T T " T 
 
 ynT.\Z.—nT^'0,handm,ill,\s aw. Aey. See elsewhere njnCD Prov. xii. 4, and the verb Deut. xi. 8; Jud. xvi. 21 ; Is. 
 «lvii. 2, etc. Jeremiah uses neither the verb nor the subetftntive.- 7ty3 with 3, Jer. vi. 21 ; Is. viii. 15 ; Lev. xxvi. 37. 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 [Vers. 11-13. The sufferings of individuals, of 
 all ages and conditions, especially their degra- 
 dation, are described. These verses still further 
 confirm the opinion, that this Song belongs to no 
 special time or locality, but that it is a general 
 enumeration of the various evils the people had 
 suffered, from the time when Jerusalem was in- 
 vaded, to the time when the Prophet indited this 
 Poem.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 11. In this and the following verses (to 
 ver. 15) are described the sorrows which befell 
 particular classes of persons at the capture of 
 the city. These are incidents whicii partly be- 
 long to an earlier period of the history, and 
 partly still continue in force. The violation of 
 the women and the hanging up of the Princes 
 are past events, but the pain they caused 
 still survives. — They ravished — dishonored. 
 [Owen: '-There is liere a delicate word for a 
 disgraceful act. The words literally are, — Wo- 
 men in Zion they humbled (or, were humbled). It 
 
CHAP. V. 11-13. 
 
 180 
 
 is humbled by the Sept. and Vulg." They suffered 
 not only the worst, but all sorts of indignities. 
 — W. H. H.]. — The women in Zion and 
 the maids — virgins — in the cities of Judah. 
 [Blayney, BoothroyDj Henderson and Noyes 
 translate the first word matrons. The Hebrew 
 word is as generic as our word women. Besides, 
 this transfers the antithesis from Zion and the 
 cities of Judah, where it belongs, to the distinc- 
 tion between matrons and maids, which the par- 
 allelism does not require. The women generally 
 were humbled, even in Zion, yea and throughout 
 all the cities of Judah. Calvin: " He mentioned 
 Sion rather than Jerusalem, — it was indeed to 
 state a part for the whole ; but that place we 
 know had been chosen by God that His name 
 might be there worshipped. . . . As, then, God 
 had there His palace, that He might dwell in the 
 midst of His people, it was a disgraceful sight 
 in the extreme to see women ravished there, for 
 the temple of God was thus violated." — W. H. H] 
 Ver. 12. Princes are — ivere [have been'] — 
 hanged up — hung — by their hand \i. e. sus- 
 pended by the hand. — W. H. H.]. This has been 
 explained in three ways. 1. The Princes hung 
 themselves with their own hand. But since, ac- 
 cording to Deut. xxi. 23, he that is hanged is ac- 
 cursed of God, this is incredible. Why could 
 they not have killed themselves in some other 
 way ? Calvin indeed surmises, that they were 
 compelled to hang themselves. But would not 
 this have been explicitly staled, if the Jews had 
 been compelled to do it ? 2. At their side [i. e. 
 Princes were hung beside or near the cities (so 
 Ewald), or at the side, or in near proximity to 
 the humbled women]. But against this are (1) 
 the masculine sufi&x, (2) and yet more the pre- 
 position 3, — it should be DT"/ (1 Sam. lix. 3 ; 
 Prov. viii. 3; 1 Chron. xviii. 17; xxiii. 28). 
 Only two places can be named, where n\3 may 
 
 stand for ^_7, namely, 1 Sam. xxi. 14 ; Job xv. 
 23. But in the first passage it is, DT3 Syhn^l, 
 he raved in or under their hands; and in Job xv. 
 23, the sense, as the connection shows, is — he 
 knows that he himself (by his own hand) has 
 prepared the day of darkness. Nothing else 
 remains for us, therefore, but to translate, 3. by 
 their hand, and to refer the sufiix to their 
 enemies. The sense, indeed, is somewhat feeble ; 
 but verbal and substantial arguments render this 
 explanation necessary. [Gerlach adopts the 
 same view. Besides the evident awkwardness 
 of this construction, it is open to the very seri- 
 ous objection, that the enemies have not been 
 mentioned in the preceding context, nor are they 
 prominently in the mind of either writer or 
 speaker. The preceding verse merely tells us 
 that women in Zion and virgins in the cities of 
 Judah had been humbled. But by whom ? The 
 natural inference is, by the public enemy. Yet 
 this is not said ; is not even inevitable, and if it 
 were, the mind of the reader is occupied with 
 the women who suffered, not with the men who 
 inflicted the injury. The pronoun, if it refers 
 to any subject in the preceding verse, must, it 
 would seem, refer to the women, or possibly to 
 the cities. But that it does not refer to either 
 »f these is evident from its gender, and from the 
 
 absence of any intelligible sense in which it can 
 refer to them. We must conclude that it refers 
 to the persons immediately named in close and 
 preceding connection, and who according to all 
 fixed rules of grammar, must be its subject. If 
 this is so, then it can only mean either, what 
 Calvin says, that the Princes committed suicide, 
 and that by hanging themselves, which as has 
 been said is utterly incredible ; or else, what the 
 collocation of the words in the original naturally 
 suggests, that the princes were hung up, i. e. sus- 
 pended, by the hand, or their hand. The pronoun 
 may properly be dispensed with, for its presence 
 here seems entirely due to the preference of the 
 writer for words ending in D ; it belongs to the 
 rhyme, or assonance, and is not intended to be 
 emphatic. So the Vulgate translates, omitting 
 the pronoun : Principes manu suspensi sunt. — 
 Henderson also omits the pronoun : but he 
 overlooks the Niphal form of the verb and makes 
 the enemy its subject. He translates. Princes 
 they hung up by the hand. Boothroyd, more cor- 
 rectly, Princes were hung up by the hand. He 
 supposes that the Princes and elders were first 
 murdered and then hung up. Owen: "The 
 most obvious meaning of the words is, that 
 Princes were hung or suspended by the hand, 
 and not by the neck. Such a punishment .... 
 may have been a barbarity resorted to by the 
 Chaldeans. This seems to be the meaning con- 
 veyed by the Versions and the Targum." If 
 they were not tortured to death in this way, it is 
 not unlikely that "the sons of Zedekiah," and 
 "all the Princes of Judah" were slain in Rib- 
 lah by being beheaded, and that their headless 
 trunks were suspended by the hands on the 
 walls of the city. Thus the headless, naked 
 body of Saul, and the bodies of his three 
 sons, were fastened to the walls of Bethshan 
 (1 Sam. xxxi. 8-12). " It was a custom with the 
 Persians, after they had slain, strangled, or be- 
 headed their enemy, to hang their bodies upon 
 poles or empale them. In this way they treated 
 Hirstseus of Miletum, and Leonidas of Lacedae- 
 mon. See Herodotus, Lib. vi. c. 30; Lib. vii. c. 
 238" (Adam Clarke). Or, there may have been 
 instances in which Princes were thus suspended, 
 not after death, nor for the purpose of killing 
 them, but as an ignominious and torturing punish- 
 ment. It is said that " no punishment is more 
 common in the East. Has a master a refractory 
 slave, . . . several men are called, who tie the 
 offender's hands and hoist him to the roof till he 
 beg forgiveness" (Comp. Comm.). — W. H. H.] 
 The faces of Elders were not regarded. 
 This is said in allusion to Lev. xix. 32, " Thou 
 shalt honor the face of the old man," comp. Lev. 
 xix. 15 ; Ex. xxiii. 3. Although in the places 
 referred to, the word Elders is intended as a 
 designation of age, not of dignity, yet we are 
 obliged to take it in the latter sense here ; be- 
 cause it is placed in parallelism with Princes, and 
 because the aged in contrast with the youthful are 
 spoken of in ver. 14. 
 
 Ver. 13. They took the young men to 
 grind — the young men are obliged to carry the mill 
 — [Noyes: Young men carried mill-stones]. The 
 Vulgate translates, Adolescentibus impudice abusi 
 sunt (same as, Adolescentes moUtionem passi sunt). 
 [DouAY : They abused the young men indecently. 
 
186 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 which is explained by this note, " i. e., made 
 them grind naked in the mill." But the second 
 clause of the verse is against any such interpre- 
 tation of the first clause. The explanations, Ju- 
 venes ad molendum sumscrunt, Young men were 
 taken to grind, and Juvenes molas agitarunt or 
 versarimt, Young men shook or turned mills, are 
 verbally incorrect, for the verb HWl does not 
 mean agitare, to shake : to give it the sense of 
 turning, i would be necessary. But the simple 
 literal meaning of the word [to lift, Gerlach : — 
 to carry'], entirely suffices. For not only was the 
 camjing of the hand-mills on the journey a heavy 
 burden, but that they carried these implies that 
 they were also compelled to turn them, t. «., to 
 
 grind with them. As thus explained, the first 
 clause corresponds with the second. And [The 
 omission of the conjunction in this song, where 
 it might be expected, makes its expression here 
 more emphatic. Young men have been compelled 
 to carry mill-stones, even hoys, or mere children have 
 fallen under the heavy burdens of wood they were 
 forced to carry. — W. H. H.] the children fell 
 under the wood. — Boys fall [properly, /cW, or 
 have fallen. — W. H. H.] under the wood. The 
 D'^inS, the most blooming and strongest of the 
 youth were obliged to carry the mill-stones (see 
 Herz. R.-Enc. x. p. 82), the boys generally were 
 required to drag the wood. [The most laborious 
 and menial services were required of the Jewish 
 youth and children. — W. H. H.] 
 
 V. 14-18. 
 
 14 The elders have ceased from the gate, the young men from their music. The 
 
 15 joy of our heart is ceased ; our dance is turned into mourning. The crown is 
 
 16 fallen from our head : woe unto us, that we have sinned ! For this our heart is 
 
 17 faint ; for these things our eyes are dim. Because of the mountain of Zion, which 
 
 18 is desolate, the foxes walk upon it. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 14. r\2^ with TO following, Jer. vii. 34; xvi. 9; xxxi. 36; xxxvi. 29; xlviii. 33.— DnjJJ. See iii. 14. 
 
 - T ■ • TT • : 
 
 Ver. 15. E'itJ'D Jeremiah uses only once, xlix. 25. The expression '3 jj^ltyo r\2^ is found in Is. xxiv. 8 ; comp. 
 Hoe. ii. 13. — ^3ni see ver. 2. — 73X7, see Am. viii. 10. Jeremiah uses the word three times, vi. 26 ; xvi. 7; xxxi. 13. — 
 ^3*7inD, see Ps. xxx. 12; Jer. xxxi. 4, 13. 
 
 Ver. 16. K'KI JT^tOV, only elsewhere in Job xix. 9. Jeremiah uses mtOJ/ once, xiii. 18. — 'IX Jeremiah uses fre- 
 quently ; iv. 13; vi. 4; x. 19; xiii. 26; xv. 10; xlviii. 46. Also XJ-'IK. iv. 81 ; xlv. 3. [Owen insists on translating the 
 
 T 
 
 particle XJ, Woe is now to its. But to one ignorant of the Hebrew, the noiv would inevitably be taken in Its temporal 
 
 T 
 
 sense, which the Hebrew particle never has. The E. V. is followed by all the English translators, except Owen. — W. H. H.j 
 — IJXtan ^2, see Jer. iii. 25 ; viii. 14; xiv. 7, 20. 
 
 T T ' 
 
 Ver. 17. nn, seei. 13, 22.— :|J'ry OCT! occurs elsewhere only in Ps. Ixix. 24. — "WVi, see iv. 8. 
 
 VT •■'■■ -.u , , • -T 
 
 Ver. 18. DOB? tJ?, see Jer. xii. 11 ; Dan. ix. 17. — ^if rdat., ii. 15. — U^i^W, Jeremiah never uses the word. He expresses 
 
 V TV • T I 
 
 the same idea otherwise, ix. 10 ; x. 22 ; xlix. 33 ; Ii. 37. — Jeremiah never uses the P.iel ^971, see Ps. Ixxxix. 16. 
 
 EXEQETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 [Vers. 14-18 depict the depressing eflfects of 
 these various wrongs and humiliations on the 
 feelings and deportment of the people. — W.H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 14. The elders have ceased from the 
 gate, the young men from their music. 
 [The German language enables Gerlach to give 
 a verbally literal translation : Die Aeltesten 
 feiern vom Thor, die Jiinglinge von ihrem Sai- 
 tenspiel. We have no words in Englisli that so 
 accurately translate flDiy and nJUJ. Noyes' 
 translation, which is also Luther's — The elders 
 sit no more at the gate ; the young men have ceased 
 from their music — restricts the meaning of the 
 first clause, mistranslates the verb, and renders 
 it necessary to supply a verb in the second clause. 
 The idea is not merely that the elders no longer 
 occupy their seats in the gates, — but that they 
 rest or cease from all those duties and pleasures 
 that pertain to their age and dignity. While 
 elders here designate old men, in antithesis to 
 
 young men, it is not to the exclusion of the 
 official elders, who are regarded as types and 
 representatives of those past middle-life, — of 
 those who especially delighted in resorting to the 
 gates of the city, whether their official duties 
 called them there or not. Henderson: "It is 
 common in the East for aged men to meet in the 
 open space without the gate of the city, to pass 
 the time in narrating or hearing the news of 
 the day, or the stories of bygone years. From 
 this an easy transition is made to the jocund 
 pastime of the young." — W. H. H.] The gate was, 
 as it were, the court of the elders of the people, 
 and, at the same time, the principal place of 
 social entertainment. See Winer, R. W. B. s. v. 
 Thore. For this reason, and also on account of 
 the second clause of the verse, we must consider, 
 not only the discontinuance of public business, 
 but the loss of that pleasure which the gate 
 atforded to the older men. The young men 
 from their music. Thenius remarks correctly 
 that Jeremiah "in the threatenings, vii. 34 and 
 xvi. 9, expresses himself concerning the loss of 
 
CHAP. V. 14-18. 
 
 18: 
 
 happiness in a way similar to this, and yet differ- 
 ing from what is said here." [To suppose this 
 verse to refer especially to the city of Jerusalem 
 (Calvin) is in itself absurd. There were no 
 longer gates, elders, or young men in Jerusalem, 
 of whom these things could be said. Through- 
 out this song, the Prophet generalizes and does 
 not particularize with reference to times and 
 places.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 15. Whilst, as has been said, vers. 11-14 
 enter into details, vers. 15, 16, generalize the 
 facts. [Ver. 14 is more closely connected with 
 what follows than with what precedes it. It de- 
 scribes the disheartening effects, on the minds 
 and conduct of the people, of what had happened. 
 It does not state, as all the preceding verses do, 
 some special cause of humiliation or suffering. — 
 W. H. H.] The joy of our heart is ceased; 
 our dance is turned into mourning. — 
 [ Ceased has the joy of our heart, changed to mourning 
 our dance. Is ceased. Gataker: " Heb. ^ai;A 
 rested: the same term that was before, ver. 14, 
 and it may seem to have some glance at such 
 mirth and cheer, as they were wont to have at 
 their solemn festivals and on their Sabbaths, 
 Deut. xvi. 11,14; xxviii. 47,48; 2 Chron. xxix. 
 36; Ps. xlii. 4; Ixxxi. 1,2; xcii. 1, 2."— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 16. The crown is fallen from our 
 head [marg. The croion of our head. SoBlaynet, 
 BooTHEOYD, Henderson, Owen. It is more 
 literal, but bad English. The crown of the head, 
 in English, is something very different from the 
 crown on the head. The one cannot fall without 
 the head it belongs to. The other may fall /row 
 the head ; so here : Fallen has the crown from our 
 head.—W. H. H] Woe unto us, that— /or— 
 we have sinned. I must regard the second 
 half of this verse as a conclusion [«. e. of a par- 
 agraph, or one of the principal parts of the 
 chapter], corresponding to that of ver. 7. I do 
 not, therefore, believe that ver. 16 is to be con- 
 nected with ver. 17, and that by the croion on our 
 head is to be understood " Jerusalem, as a diadem 
 set upon Zion with its splendid palaces" (The- 
 Nius), although the expression by itself could 
 have such an interpretation. Rather, I believe 
 that the first clause of ver. 16 is in very close con- 
 nection with ver. 15 ; and that the first clause 
 of ver. 16 declares, that not only all joy, but also 
 all honor has forsaken Jerusalem. The crown 
 on the head of Jerusalem had consisted in this, 
 that she was great among the nations, a princess 
 among the provinces, and perfect in beauty, the joy 
 of the whole earth (i. 1 ; ii. 15). [It confuses the 
 sense to suppose that Jerusalem is the subject 
 from whose head the crown has fallen. The 
 people generally are the subject ; " the crown of 
 our head has fallen." In the loss of independent 
 nationality, and of all honor among the nations, 
 who now treated them with the utmost contempt, 
 the crown had indeed fallen from their heads. 
 However intimately related are vers. 7 and 16, 
 however striking and fine it would be, rhetori- 
 cally considered, if each stood in the position of 
 an emphatic conclusion to corresponding strophes 
 (if this is poetry), or paragraphs (if it is prose); 
 yet, in point of fact, each of these verses is too 
 intimately connected with the verses immediately 
 following it, to be separated from them without 
 injuring the logical connection of the thoughts. 
 
 — W. H. H.] — We have sinned ! A gratifying 
 advance is observable here, in so far as the people 
 now openly and honorably confess their own 
 guilt. See iii. 39-42. 
 
 Vers. 17, 18. These two verses constitute the 
 introduction to the closing prayer, vers. 19-22. 
 They refer to a fact which must be the cause of 
 deepest pain to a heart truly attached to the theo- 
 cracy, — the desolation of the holy mountain. 
 But this gloomy and dark image constitutes only 
 the back-ground for those noble and consolatory 
 thoughts with which the Bard (Sanger) comforts 
 himself in his prayer. 
 
 Ver. 17. For this our heart is faint; for 
 these things our eyes are dim. Onthisaccnunt 
 is our heart faint, therefore are our eyes become dim. 
 For the reasons given above we refer the pronomi- 
 nal phrases ni~7j;^, on this account [i&Toh) [E.V., 
 for this], and nyX"?^, therefore (dariiber) [E.V., 
 
 for these things'], to what follows in reference to 
 Mount Zion in ver. 18. [The objections to this 
 interpretation are insuperable. 1. In point of 
 fact, the desolation of Zion was not the only, nor 
 the absorbing cause of grief, as is evident from 
 the whole of the preceding part of this Song, in 
 which abundant and terrible causes of distress 
 are given, without a single allusion to the desola- 
 tion of Zion. 2. The second pronominal suffix 
 
 n7X~7^ (correctly translated in English Ver- 
 sion, for these things) is plural, and must include 
 more than the first suffix HT";^ (/or this thitig), 
 which is singular. It is obvious that both can- 
 not refer to the single statement in ver, 18, that 
 Mount Zion has become desolate. Nor can it be 
 said, that two things are stated in ver. 18, name- 
 ly, that Mount Zion is desolate ; and that the 
 foxes run upon it. For the latter statement is a 
 mere expansion or illustration of the first: and 
 it would be very absurd to make the latter a 
 special and additional cause of grief, regarded as 
 in any sense distinct from the first great fact that 
 the mountain is desolate. 3. This interpreta- 
 tion involves a redundancy of relative expository 
 phrases, all referring to the same thing, that is 
 useless, inelegant, and utterly incongruous with 
 the prevailing style of composition in the Lamen- 
 tations, which is terse, compressed and remarka- 
 ble for the absence of words not actually indis- 
 pensable, as, for example, of the connecting 1 
 (which the Masorites were so anxious to insert), 
 and of the repeated verb, causing a constant re- 
 currence of the Zeugma, see vers. 2, 3, 6, 8, 11, 
 14, 19. Is it likely that such a writer would say, 
 
 on account of this thing (HI"/^), on account of these 
 
 things (rivN"/^), on account of (7^) Mount Zion, 
 
 etc., our heart is faint, our eyes are dim; using three 
 relative expository phrases, where one would 
 have sufficed ? 4. By referring the verse to what 
 precedes it, these relative phrases, instead of 
 being redundant and cumbersome, become signi- 
 ficant and impressive. For this (namely, that the 
 crown has fallen from our head because we have 
 sinned), our heart is faint; for these things (name- 
 ly, all the evils that have been recited), our eye* 
 are dim. We may then take ver. 18 as an ad- 
 
188 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 ditional reason for lamentation, translating /Jl, 
 on account of, or take it as an independent, but not 
 unrelated, thought, translating 7^, as to: see re- 
 marks on that verse. — W. H. H.] — Our eyes are 
 dim [our eyes have become dim'^. We must regard 
 weeping, according to ii. 11, as the immediate 
 causae of the eyes becoming dim. [Weeping sug- 
 gests itself as a sufficient physical cause, and if 
 the Prophet means this, then our eyes have become 
 dim, is a poetical way of intimating how greatly 
 they have wept. But there is no allusion to tears 
 in the context; the period of violent weeping, 
 indeed, we may regard as past : and the parallel- 
 ism is better carried out by regarding the dimness 
 of the eyes as the effect of the faintness of the 
 heart. So Notes: '■'■our eyes are dim; i. e.,i\iTO\xg\\. 
 faintness the sight of our eyes departs. On the 
 other hand, the eyes are said to be enlightened 
 when the strength is restored and faintness de- 
 parts. See 1 Sam. xiv. 29." We are not to re- 
 strict the thought to merely physical causes and 
 effects. The faintness of the heart suggests a 
 moral cause, the effect of which would be that 
 moral dimness of sight which ensues, when God 
 is no longer seen and hope expires. It is this 
 underlying thought that connects ver. 17 with 
 ver. 18.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 18. Because of the mountain of 
 Zion, w^hich is [has become'] desolate, the 
 foxes V7alk upon it. The Mount of Zion is 
 here evidently intended, not in the restricted 
 sense, but in the wider sense in which it "in- 
 cludes Moriah." See Dblitzsch on Ps. ii. 6; 
 ix. 12; Ixxvi. 3, etc. [The name Zion is used 
 throughout the Lamentations, with great uni- 
 formity and precision, of Jerusalem as the theocra- 
 tic city, where God has His dwelling-place, and 
 always with special reference to the most sacred 
 precincts of that city, where were the Temple of 
 God and the palace of the king. Here the word 
 Mount makes the designation more plain. The 
 whole city, doubtless, is intended ; but it is the 
 city regarded as the dwelling-place of God, the 
 throne of the Theocracy. Probably the word is 
 always used by the Prophets in this sense; and 
 a regard to this fact will spare us the difficulties 
 of determining whether Mount Moriah, the Tem- 
 ple mount, was included generically in Mount 
 Zion, or is always to be distinguished from Mount 
 Zion. — W. H. H.] — The foxes walk [have 
 walked] upon it. Where these beasts live the 
 habitations of men must have ceased to exist. 
 See Ps. Ixiii. 11 ; comp. Judg. xv. 4; Ez. xiii. 4. 
 It may also be properly assumed, that if Jerusa- 
 lem had been destroyed within a few weeks, those 
 ravenous beasts were busily engaged roaming 
 through its holy precinta seeking for the carcases 
 
 of the dead. [Foxes, whyw. Jackals, Booth- 
 KOYD, Wordsworth, Gerlaoh. See Kitto's 
 Cyc. Bib. Lit. If preying on dead men was men- 
 tioned, or even distinctly hinted at, we might be 
 fure that the jackal, or wolf, or some other 
 ravenous member of the canine species, is proba- 
 bly intended ; for foxes are not addicted to this. 
 A better reason for supposing that jackals are 
 111 ant, is the plural form of the word (though 
 til 3 could be explained by the preference of the 
 writer for terminations in D), as if they went 
 
 about on the Holy Mount in companies ; for the 
 jackal is a gregarious, the fox a solitary animal. 
 
 But the Hebrew i3~Oyri, may mean, not walking 
 about on the mountain, but walking in the fre- 
 quentative sense, or living (see ^vH, Piel in Eccl. 
 iv. 16) in the mountain. In this case the refer- 
 ence would be to these animals, whether foxes 
 or jackals, having their burrows there, remaining 
 there permanently and undisturbed. This gives a 
 better idea of the utter desolation that reigned 
 on Mount Zion, and is more consonant with the 
 fact, that more than "a few weeks" must have 
 elapsed since the city was completely destroyed 
 and consumed to its foundations, and, therefore, 
 there were no corpses there to invite the preda- 
 tory excursions of the jackals. — But what is the 
 connection of ver. 18 with ver. 17 ? How is the 
 
 preposition /^ to be translated ? Broughtok 
 very elegantly preserves the obscurity of the 
 origipal ; "/br this our heart is sick, /or these 
 things our eyes be dim. For Mount Sion which 
 is desolate, the foxes walk upon it." We can 
 
 translate i^, as in the preceding verse, on ac- 
 count of, and then this verse is immediately con- 
 nected with the preceding verse, and assigns an 
 additional reason, why the heart is sick, and the 
 eyes dim, namely, that Mount Zion is desolate. 
 That is the same as saying, that God has with- 
 drawn from His people: their heart is faint and 
 their eyes dim on account of past and present 
 troubles, and also because there is no prospect 
 of relief for them, for God's house is destroyed, 
 and Jehovah has forsaken His people. This is 
 excellent sense, and were there no question as to 
 the grammatical construction we might be satis- 
 fied with it. But we may translate 7^, as to 
 (Gerlach, tiber), as to Mount Zion which has be- 
 come desolate, the foxes have walked upon it. Thus 
 rendered, this verse is independent of the pre- 
 ceding verse as to grammatical construction, but 
 intimately related to it in sense. This is recom- 
 mended by several considerations. 1. 7^, by 
 itself, rarely has the sense of on account of. 2. 
 The VJ, relativum, properly throws the idea con- 
 nected with it into a parenthesis. If so, then the 
 idea that Zion lies waste, is not the prominent 
 idea, but is subordinate to what, in itself is an 
 insignificant fact, that the foxes walk upon it. 
 Surely that could not constitute the climax of 
 their grief, who had to lament for dishonored 
 women, princes, and elders, and the cruellest 
 oppression of tender children ! 3. If the foxes 
 walking on Zion is a fact significant of something 
 else of far deeper import (as in truth it is, though 
 this method of construction does not suggest that 
 interpretation), yet in such a case it is to be ob- 
 served, that the i^ should be repeated before the 
 
 last clause. Our heart is faint, our eyes dim. Be- 
 cause of Mount Zion, because the foxes walk upon 
 it. In every case the construction is awkward. 
 
 4. By taking 7^ in the sense of as to, we have 
 perfect grammatical construction : .45 to Mount 
 Zion, which has become desolate, the foxes walk upon 
 
CHAP. V. 19-22. 
 
 189 
 
 it! 5. This at once suggests the real force of the 
 expression, the foxes walk upon it, and gives dig- 
 nity to what else would be an insignificant cul- 
 mination point of the sublime grief expresssed in 
 what precedes. As to Mount Zion, from whence 
 ought to come our help aud salvation, the foxes 
 have it now for their home ! It is no longer the 
 dwelling-place of God, and the refuge of His peo- 
 ple. This is no sentimental effusion of grief, that 
 the foxes roam where the proud and happy city 
 once stood. It is the expression of a terrible 
 
 truth, that Jehovah had forsaken His people ; and 
 what had been His dwelling-place, now laid waste 
 and destroyed, is the home of wild beasts. 6. 
 This explanation is favored by the emphatic 
 declaration that follows in ver. 19, and especially 
 by the emphatic expression of the personal pro- 
 noun: Thou, Jehovah art forever. Thy dwelling- 
 place is the home of the wild beasts, but Thou 
 Thyself dost still exist, dost still reign, and Thy 
 people pray Thee to return to them, and have 
 mercy upon them. — W. H. H.] 
 
 V. 19-22. 
 
 19 Thou, O Lord, remainest forever; thy throne from generation to generation. 
 20, 21 Wherefore dost thou forget us forever, and forsake us so long time ? Turn thou 
 22 us unto thee, O Lord, and we shall be turned ; renew our days as of old. But 
 thou hast utterly rejected us ; thou art very wroth against us. 
 
 TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. 
 
 Ver. 19. — [Blatnet : " The LXX., Syr., Vulg. and Arabic all express the conjunction at the beginning of this versa 
 Two MSS. read riflXI, and so it is found in the notes of the celebrated printed Bible, No. 300"] — SD3, frequently in Jere- 
 miah, i. 15 ; iii. 17, efc. — "im Tn 7 Jeremiah never uses. He says only once im ^n 1^,1.39. [The writer who only 
 
 T : T - 
 
 once used a common expression with a common preposition, is thf very one who would be likely only once to use the same 
 
 expression with another preposition. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 20.— nVjS, Jer. iii. 5; 1.39.— n^t^, Jer. ii. 32; iii. 21, etc.— 3Ij;, Jer. ii. 13 ; xii. 7, ete.— IIK Jeremiah uevsr 
 uses. See Ps. xxiii. 6; xciii. 5. 
 
 Ver. 21. — The verb \il'^^\ (except here, used only in Piel and Hiph.) is not found in Jeremiah. — DTDJ, see Jer. xxx. 30. 
 
 -T . vlv: 
 
 Ver. 22. — DNID, Jer- J'iv. 19, ii.37; vi. 30, etc. — ^Yp, Jer. xxxvii. 5. — IKD Jeremiah uses twice, xviii. 13; xlviii. 16; 
 
 ^KD~^J7 never. [Poor little '\^, slighted by Jeremiah twice! takes its revenge by having the last word to say against his 
 
 authorship of the Lamentations. — W. H. H.] 
 
 EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 
 
 Vers. 19-22. This short prayer contains four 
 thoughts. 1. A positive source of consolation; 
 the throne of the Lord stanJs immovably fast, 
 ver. 19. 2. A question : Why then should the 
 Lord forget His people forever ? ver. 20. 3. A 
 petition : that the Lord would re-establish His 
 people spiritually and temporally, ver. 21. 4. 
 A negative source of consolation: the Lord can- 
 not be angry forever, ver. 22. 
 
 Ver. 19. Thou, O LORD,— T'/io?/. Jehovah. 
 [Blay.\ey, Boothroyd, Noyks: But Thou, Jeho- 
 vah. See Textual notes above. Whether the 1 
 originally belonged to the text or not, the em- 
 phatic expression of the personal pronoun XjlX, 
 and the parallelism between vers. 18 and 19, in- 
 volve the sense of but, yet, or as to, before the 
 pronoun. As to Zion, it is desolate, — but Thou 
 endurest forever, or as to Thee, though Thy dwel- 
 ling-place is gone. Thou endurest. Gataker in- 
 dicates this in this brief note, '■'But, or Yet, to 
 be supplied." — W. H. H.]. — Remainest for- 
 ever, — [lit., sittest forever. But when this is 
 said of God or of human monarchs, it always 
 refers to their occupying the throne; see Ps. Ixi. 
 8 (7); ix. 5 (4), 12 (11); Zech. vi. 13. The 
 king sits, the subject stands. Tlie instant men- 
 tion of the throne, shows lluit this must be the 
 meaning here. Not God's continual existence, 
 
 but His uninterrupted sovereignty over His crea- 
 tures. Henderson and Noyes translate, sittest as 
 king. But this seems to lower the thought to a com- 
 parison with human monarchs. Though God is 
 called and is a King, yet it is not as any ordinai-y 
 king that He occupies the throne Gerlach 
 translates. Thou art enthroned forever. This pro- 
 duces a slight tautology. Thou reignest forever 
 (Gataker), may, perhaps, be as accurate a 
 translation of the word, as our English affords. 
 — W. H. H.]. — Thy throne from generation 
 to generation. See Ps. xlv. 7; Ixxxix. 5; 
 xciii. 2. In opposition to the desolation of the 
 external sanctuary, the Poet holds up before 
 himself the consolation, that the Lord Himself 
 nevertheless sits firmly on His throne and His 
 kingdom remains immovable. The heathen could 
 destroy the Temple ; to the Lord Himself they 
 could do no harm. See Ps. ix. 8 (7) ; xxix. 10, 
 cxlvi. 10 ; cxxv. 1. 
 
 Ver. 20. Wherefore dost thou forget us 
 forever, and forsake us so long time? ( marg. 
 for length of days). ^yhy shnuldest Thou forever 
 forget us, and forsake us for long time ? It ought 
 to be distinctly observed, that it is not said 
 ^jrinpiZ;, Thou hast forgotten, ^Ji"^3T||, Thou hast 
 forsaken. The Poet does not ask, Why hast Thou 
 forgotten and forsaken us forever? But why 
 wouldst or shouldst Thou forsake us forever' 
 That He would do this, the Poet cannot belif^re. 
 See Ps. Ixxiv. 2 (1) ; Ixxvii. 8-10 (7-9). [Aa 
 
im 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OP JEUEMIAH. 
 
 Owen has suggested, we are undoubtedly to re- 
 gard this as a prayer for present and immediate 
 relief. The Prophet well understood that the 
 captivity would not end before seventy years. 
 That for that time at least Zion must remain 
 desolate. He also firmly believed that after that 
 time, the people would return to their own land, 
 and God would dwell on Mount Zion. He could 
 not therefore ask, with any reference to the 
 possibility of such a thing, if God intended to 
 forsake the Jewish people forever ? But what 
 He does ask is, if He would forever or alwai/s 
 (nVJ, constantly, continuously) forget and forsake 
 for length of days, for a long period of time, or 
 for all their life-time, that suffering generation 
 of His people? Would He leave them in their 
 present misery without any relief, any show of 
 mercy ? Though Zion was desolate, and God 
 had withdrawn His theocratic presence from the 
 people, and the Prophet knew that He would not 
 in that sense return to the people again, till that 
 sinful generation was dead, yet, he says, Thou 
 still art God, Thou reignest forever, Thy throne 
 remains unmoved by any mundane events, — why 
 then shouldst Thou continuously, persistently 
 forget us and completely abandon us to our pre- 
 sent sorrow ? The pronoun us here, embraces 
 the persons of those embraced by the us in the 
 preceding verses of the Song. Had he intended 
 the people as such, and not the people individu- 
 ally considered, he would probably have used 
 some such designation as the daughter of Thy 
 people, or simply Thy people. The prayer as 
 thus interpreted was answered. Long before 
 the captivity ended, God had mercy on the suf- 
 ferers, gave them favor in the eyes of men, and 
 relieved them from many of their distresses. 
 The verse then ought to be translated. Wherefore 
 shouldst Thou always forget us, shouldst Thou aban- 
 don us — i. e. to our present misery— :/b7- le?igth of 
 days, that is, for any long but indefinite period 
 of time ?— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 21. Turn Thou us unto Thee, O 
 LORD — Jehovah — and we shall be turned. 
 The Poet well knows that a restoration is possi- 
 ble ; but he also knows its conditions. He has 
 before his eyes what is said in Jer. xxxi. 16-22; 
 ill. 1-4, 12, in which the idea 2W [to turn] is 
 employed in a variety of ways. — The words 
 nn^E/jl -U^'C^/n [turn us and we shall turn'] are a 
 direct quotation from Jer. xxxi. 18. See re- 
 marks on that passage. Comp. Ps. Ixxx. 4 (3), 
 8 (7), 20 (19). The question is whether the 
 Poet prayed only for temporal, or only for spi- 
 ritual restoration ? It is in point of fact not 
 imaginable, that there could be one without the 
 other. But he knows that in order to either 
 kind of restoration, the Lord must take the 
 initiative. And especially, first of all, He must 
 lead back the people to Himself. Only when the 
 Lord has accomplished this — but then most cer- 
 tainly — will ilie people return back to the Lord 
 and to tlie place of His gracious presence and so 
 be restored to the old covennnt relationship. 
 [There arc ihree ways of iiiidorstandirig tliis 
 prayer, which Dr. Naeoei.suach lias not ilistin- 
 t;uishi'd with liis usual iidmir.ihle pei-spicuity. 
 1. It can lie understood ns a prayer tor tlie re- 
 storatiun of the old condition of things, involv- 
 
 ing a return to their own land. Owen : " ' Tht 
 meaning of this sentence is,' says Grotics, ' Re- 
 store us to Thy favor, that we may be restored 
 to our ancient state.' Were this evidently the 
 meaning, the rendering ought to be thus, — Restore 
 us, O Jehovah, to Thyself , that we 7nay be restored." 
 It is obvious that the words so translated do not 
 express what is claimed for them. Restore us to 
 Thyself, that we may be restored, can only mean 
 that we may be restored to Thyself. This might 
 involve as a consequence the return of the 
 " ancient state." But if that had been the main 
 idea, it would have been difi"erently expressed. 
 Besides people are apt to pray for what they 
 most need and are likely to get. The pressing 
 need of the people now, was instant relief from 
 sulFering. This they might have without a re- 
 turn to their land. The latter they could not 
 expect for themselves, and were sure that it 
 would come eventually to a future generation. 
 
 2. In a strictly theocratic sense. That God would 
 bring them back to Himself and they be restored 
 to His favor and blessed with all the blessings 
 of the covenant. This would not involve neces- 
 sarily an immediate return to their own land ; 
 and gives a good sense. Yet it does not seem 
 fully to express the natural meaning of the 
 words. Nor is it grammatically correct to take 
 2W1 in a passive, instead of an active sense. 
 
 3. It can be regarded as a prayer for converting 
 grace. Turn Thou us to Thyself and we shall turn, 
 i. e. to Thee. This is the simplest and most 
 natural translation. It is consistent with the 
 fact, that the people throughout this Song, while 
 speaking collectively, are yet regarded as indi- 
 viduals. It harmonizes with the evident mean- 
 ing of ver. 20. It is such a prayer as was emi- 
 nently proper in their circumstances. It is 
 consistent with the whole doctrine of the Bible 
 in regard to converting grace, or the grace of 
 repentance. Finally, it prepares the way for the 
 final petitition, renew our days as of old. — W. H. 
 H.]. — Renew our days as of old. The con- 
 struction is a prolepsis. Renew our days, i. e. 
 vitam, vitse conditionem. Job x. 6, so that the}' may 
 be as they were formerly. [This petition is 
 general and comprehensive. It reaches forward 
 to the time when all they had possessed and en- 
 joyed would be theirs again as a people, — Coun- 
 try, Temple, Priest, Prophet, and King. But it 
 does not require the instant or even speedy ful- 
 filment of these things ; nor does this petition 
 afi'ord any ground for the argument (Owkn) that 
 the preceding petition must be of the same pur- 
 port.— W. H. H.] 
 
 Ver. 22. But Thou hast utterly rejected 
 us; (marg. For wilt Thou utterly reject us 'I ] Thou 
 art very -wroth against us. Or hast Thou 
 wholly rejected us, and art exceedingly angry with 
 u.'i? The verse contains, as remarked above, a 
 negative fundamental statement. The meaning 
 of the conjunction DN ^2 [but, except, unless] is, 
 it 7nay he then that. See Gen. xxviii. 17; Is. xlii. 
 19; i?rov. iii. 12 ; my Or. g 110, 4, note, Ew.\ld, 
 I .3.3f). The idea of realization is to be supplied 
 before tlie conjunction, from the foregoing 
 prayer; this will be done, unless Thou 7nayest 
 have utterly abandoned us. [Calvin : Except Thou 
 hast wholly rejected us, and hast become very angry 
 
CHAP. V, 19-22. 
 
 191 
 
 vith us. BooTHROYD puts the first clause inter- 
 rogatively, For wilt Thou altogether cast us offi 
 Thou hast been wroth against us exceedingly . But 
 both verbs are preterites, and neither can be 
 taken in a future sense. For the same reason, 
 the verbs cannot be translated as Noyes renders 
 them, taking both clauses interrogatively, For 
 ahouldst Thou utterly reject us ? Shouldst Thou be 
 to exceedingly wroth against us ? We must either 
 accept the sense of Dr. Naegelsbach's transla- 
 tion, with which Calvin and Gerlach agree, or 
 accept the text of the English Version, with 
 which agree Sept., Syr., Arab., Vulg., Targ., 
 Broughton, Blayney, Henderson, and Owen, 
 an imposing weight of authority. If we adopt 
 the latter sense, then we must accept of Owen's 
 as the only possible explanation, that the re- 
 ference is to themselves as individuals, not 
 as representatives of the Jewish race. They 
 knew that God had not utterly rejected the 
 nation. They knew that as a nation, they 
 would be restored to their land. In either 
 case, the opinion that this prayer is a prayer for 
 immediate relief as individuals, and not for final 
 restoration as a nation, is evident. For, if we 
 adopt the sense of the text of the English version, 
 we cannot believe that Jeremiah meant to an- 
 nounce the utter rejection of the nation ; and if 
 we prefer the sense of the margin of the English 
 version, we cannot believe that Jeremiah would 
 close this magnificent poem with a question in- 
 volving the possibility of God's utter rejection 
 of the whole nation. Rather, we must regard 
 these closing words as one last plaintive cry for 
 mercy, — unless Thou hast utterly rejected us, who 
 are now in misery, and hast become exceedingly 
 angry with us, so that Thy wrath cannot be ap- 
 peased, and the mercy, we implore in vain for 
 ourselves, is to be reserved for another and more 
 pious generation of Israelites. — W. H. H.] 
 
 Tlje Hebrew codices repeat, for the purpose of 
 synagogue reading, after ver. 22, the words of 
 ver. 21, as they do also [repeat the verse before 
 the last, after the last verse] at the close of 
 Isaiah, Malachi, and Ecclesiastes, "in order to 
 close with consolatory words." See Delitzsch, 
 Is. p. 651. [Hugh Broughton : Turn us, 
 Eternal, unto Thee, and we shall return ; renew our 
 days as of old. The ver. 21 is one of the four 
 which, in the Massoretli Bible, are printed as a 
 postscript for better memory. Another is the 
 last save one in Ecclesiastes, another the last 
 save one in Esay, the fourth the last save one in 
 Malachi, as I noted upon Ecclesiastes. These 
 sayiiitrs contain the main of the writers. That 
 in Ecclesiastes biddeth us look for all happiness 
 in the world to come, that of Esay telleth how 
 all Moyses' policy shall end. That of Malachi 
 showeth how John Baptist shall begin the New 
 Testament. And this of Jeremy telleth that God 
 will begin a new state for his people. Upon that 
 they studied in Babylon fifty years, and they 
 made themselves a golden age, knowing that the 
 kingdom of Christ was in sufi'ering. Afterwards 
 they are plainly told of the true kingdom, and 
 be renewed, as of old. This verse was given in 
 the beginning of the captivity for a comfort that 
 way." Wordsworth: ^' Turn Thou us unto Thee, 
 Lord, and ice shall be turned. A very appro- 
 priate prayer for Israel weeping over the ruins 
 
 of Jerusalem, — destroyed first by the Chaldeaa 
 armies, and next, on the anniversary of the same 
 day, by the power of Rome, for its sins. Israel 
 says, ' Turn Thou us, Lord, and we shall be 
 turned ;' and the Apostle of Israel, the great 
 Hebrew of the Hebrews, St. Paul, says, ' Even 
 unto this day, when Moses is read, the veil is 
 upon their heart. Nevertheless, when it shall 
 turn unto the Lord, the veil shall be taken away' 
 (2 Cor. iii. 15, 16). May He hasten the time! 
 Then the dirge of Lamentation will be changed 
 into a jubilee of joy."] 
 
 DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 
 
 1. Ver. 1. Remember, O LORD. "It is 
 
 unworthy of the majesty of God to impute the 
 fault of forgetfulne&s to Him, but He may be en- 
 treated to be mindful or to remember, in order 
 to render speedy assistance to the needy, and thus 
 make manifest what \_viz. His remembrance] was 
 beforeconcealed." RHABANUsinGHisLER.,p. 213. 
 
 2. Ver. 1. [Consider, and behold. Calvin: 
 " The words, though brief and concise, yet con- 
 tain a useful doctrine, that God is pleased to 
 bring help to the miserable when their evils 
 come to an account before Him, especially when 
 they are unjustly oppressed. It is indeed cer- 
 tain, that nothing is unknown to God, but this 
 mode of speaking is according to the perceptions 
 of men; for we think that God disregards our 
 miseries, or we imagine that His back is turned 
 to us when He docs not immediately succor us. 
 But He is simply to be asked to look on our evils, 
 . . . as soon as He is pleased to look on the evils 
 we suffer, aid is at the same time prepared for 
 us." — Our reproach. Calvin: "There is men- 
 tion especially made of reproach, that the indig- 
 nity might move God the more ; for it was for 
 this end that He took the people under His 
 protection, that they might be for His glory and 
 honor, as Moses says. As then, it was God's will 
 that the riches of His glory should appear in that 
 people, nothing could have been more inconsis- 
 tent than that, instead of gloi-y, they should 
 have nothing but disgrace and reproach. This, 
 then, is the reason why the Prophet makes a 
 special mention of the reproach of the people.' ] 
 
 3. Ver. 1. " He does not say, ' Remember, 
 Lord, our enemies, that they may suffer as their 
 deeds deserve,' but, 'Be mindful of what has 
 happened to us,' as if he would say in efi'ect, 
 ' Remembering the evils which we suffer take 
 them away, but overlook the doers of them.' 
 When he says, 'What has happened,' or 'what 
 has been done to us,' he discriminates between 
 what we suffer and what is natural [normal], 
 for these evils are not natural or normal, but 
 accidental, resulting from the manifold efi"ects 
 of sin." Paschasius in Ghisler., p. 213. 
 
 4. Ver. 1. "The cross seems all the lighter 
 when we lament over it to a true, confidential 
 friend, and show him how it pains us, and he 
 with brotherly sympathy or good advice, removes 
 from us a part of our burden. But men cannot 
 always help us, however sincerely they desire to 
 do so. But he who commends his afi'airs to God, 
 complains to the right and faithful Helper, who 
 has invited us to pray to Him (Ps. xiii. 6; xxvii. 
 8; xxxvii. 5; Iv. 23; Sir. iL 11)." Egid. Hun- 
 
192 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 Nius. "In aJversity we should not, with the 
 Papists, fly for assistance to the dead, who are 
 ignorant of our afflictions (Is. Ixiii. 16;) nor, with 
 the superstitious and profane, to magicians and 
 wizards (Is. viii. 19, 20) ; but, after the example 
 of the church in this passage, we should fly to 
 the Lord (Hos. vi. 1-3 [E. V. Hos. v. 15-vi. 2] ; 
 2 Chr. XX. 12)." Forster. 
 
 5. Vers. 2-16. " Because everything contained 
 in this list of evils was long before predicted 
 to the Israelites with the greatest exactness [lit. 
 to a very hair's breadth^ in the ancient Mosaic 
 list [of curses], contained in the twenty-eighth 
 chapter of Deuteronomy, ... we learn from the 
 agreement of the Mosaic list with the manifest 
 eventu or fulfilment in the captive people of Ju- 
 dah, how the threateninga, contained for us in 
 God's word are to be regarded, not as mere 
 empty, inefficient words to terrify us, but for an 
 undoubted, sure, and certain reckoning and list, 
 whereby Gods temporal and eternal wrath from 
 Heaven against the ungodly is revealed and 
 threatened, as it is written in the first chapter 
 of Romans." Egid. Hunnius. " This is useful, 
 that we may carry the cup straight, and look well 
 to ourselves, lest it may happen to us in the same 
 way that faith comes to be experience." Cramer. 
 
 6. Ver. 2. " That these things may not happen 
 to us also, let us be pious, upright, and tempe- 
 rate in the acquisition, possession, and use of our 
 property ; in reference to which Paul admonishes 
 us in 1 Cor. vii. 30, 31, that while we are in the 
 world, we should not use the world [Vulg.], that 
 we may have worldly possessions, but should 
 possess them as though we had them not. Be- 
 sides that threefold woe of Habakkuk (ii. 6) 
 presses hard upon us. Use is commendable, 
 abuse criminal " Forster. 
 
 7. Ver. 8. Our mothers are as ■widovvs. 
 " By mothers are intended the seven synagogues, 
 which are known to have been established prin- 
 cipally on the Mount Olives, from which flowed 
 the milk of doctrine. . . . But in the time of the 
 siege or of the Chaldean ravages, their children 
 having been removed, they were abandoned and 
 consumed with fire." Paschasius in Ghisler., 
 p. 214. 
 
 8. Vers. 4, 6, 9, 10. " We learn especially how 
 God punishes the misuse of His gifts of plenty 
 and abundance ; when, for instance, men are not 
 thankful to God in times of profusion and cheap- 
 ness, but squander useles.sly His gifts, wine and 
 fruits of the earth, by gormandizing and carous- 
 ing, gluttonizing and guzzling, banqueting and 
 tippling ; tlien God withdraws His blessings and 
 gifts ; food becomes scarce so that it is not easily 
 procured ; and He sends a famine so that water 
 and precious bread can hardly be obtained, as 
 was the case with the Jewish people. But they 
 had well deserved it by their rioting, which the 
 Prophet Isaiah long before rebuked, when he 
 enu:aorated, among otlier gross vices oFthe house 
 of Judah, drunkenness also, and called down a 
 woe upon ii (Is. v. 11-13, comp. Amos vi. 4-7) . . . 
 But the punishment terminates not in temporal 
 poverty. Excessive indulgence in eating and 
 drinking is such a pernicious vice that a man 
 forfeits thereby his part in the Kingdom of Hea- 
 ven (1 Cor. vi. 9, 10), and must be deprived of 
 •ternal happiness, and must suffer thirst with 
 
 the rich drunkard eternally in the flames of Hell 
 (Luke xvi. ; Is. v. 14)." Egid. Hunnius. 
 
 9. Ver. 6. " According to the real meaning of 
 the Hebrew, the church weeps for lier children, 
 when members of Christ and ministers of the 
 altar, for the sake of earthly things, give the 
 hand to those more powerful or to worldly men, 
 who are rendered foul by the blackness of their 
 [ill-gotten] wealth or other crimes." Paschasius 
 in Ghisler., p. 216. 
 
 10. Ver. 7. "Undeservedly, Roman, must 
 thou pay the penalty for the sins of thine ances- 
 tors." Horace, Odes, B. III., Ode 6. "Already 
 have we sufficiently expiated the perjury of the 
 Laomedonian Troy with our blood." Virgil. 
 Georg. I., 501, 2. "This is rightly lamented in 
 the church also, that when the priests and the 
 princes of the earth are delinquent, for their faults, 
 as it were, the people are punished." Paschasius 
 in Ghisler., p. 218. "When their kings act the 
 fool, the Greeks are punished." Horace. 
 
 11. Ver. 7. [Pool's Annot. : "We must not 
 understand this in the same sense as Ez. xviii. 
 2, where God reflecteth upon them for using a 
 proverb to this sense. It is the Prophet who 
 here speaketh, and in the name of the godly 
 Jews, who would not excuse themselves as if 
 they sufi"ered merely for their forefathers' sins. 
 But the Prophet confesseth and bewaileth that 
 God had punished their iniquities and the iniqui- 
 ties of their forefathers together ; and it was 
 better with their forefathers who had sinned, 
 and were dead and gone, than with them, upon 
 whom the punishment of their iniquity did abide, 
 and was like so to do for a long time." — Out 
 fathers have sinned, and are not. Calvin: 
 " Our Prophet's object was to turn God to mercy ; 
 and to attain this object he says, ' Lord, Thou 
 indeed hast hitherto executed just punishment, 
 because our fathers had very long abused Thy 
 goodness and forbearance ; but now the time has 
 come for Thee to try and prove whether we are 
 like our fathers; as then, they have perished as 
 they deserved, receive us now into favor.' We 
 hence see that thus no quarrel or contention is 
 carried on with God, but only that the miserable 
 exiles ask God to look on them, since their fathers, 
 who had provoked God and had experienced His 
 dreadful vengeance, were already dead." — And 
 •we have borne their iniquities. Calvin : 
 " When he says that the sons bore the iniquities 
 of the fathers, though it be a strong expression, 
 yet its meaning is not as though God, without 
 reason, punished their children and not their 
 fathers; for unalterable is that declaration, 'The 
 son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, nor 
 tiie father the iniquity of the son ; but the soul 
 that sinneth it shall die' (Ez. xviii. 20). It may 
 yet be said that the children are loaded with the 
 sins of their fathers, because God, as He declares 
 by Moses, extends His vengeance to the third 
 and fourth generation (Ex. xx. 6). And He says 
 also in another place, ' 1 will return into the 
 bosom of children the iniquity of tixeir fathers' 
 (Jer. xxxii. 18). God theu continued His ven- 
 geance to their posterity. But yet there is no 
 doubt but that the children who had been so 
 severely punished, bore also the punishment of 
 their own iniquity, for tliey deserved a hundred 
 deaths. But these two things well agree together, 
 
CHAP. V. 
 
 103 
 
 that God returns the iniquity of the fathers into 
 the bosom of their children, and yet that the 
 children are chastised for their own sins." 
 Henkt : " They acknowledge the reproach of sin 
 wliich they bear. This comes in, in the midst 
 of their complaints, but may well be put in the 
 front of them. This is not here a peevish com- 
 plaint, or an imputation of unrighteousness to 
 God, like what we have in Jer. xxxi. 29 ; Ez. 
 xviii. 2, but a penitent confession of the sins of 
 their ancestors, which they themselves had also 
 persisted in, for which they now justly suffered. 
 Thus they submit themselves to the Divine justice, 
 and refer themselves to the Divine pity. And, 
 truly, the sins God looks back upon in punishing, 
 we must look back upon in repenting, and must 
 notice all that will help to justify God in cor- 
 recting us. And if we be penitent and patient 
 under what we suffer for the sins of our fathers, 
 we may expect that He who punishes will pity, 
 and soon return in mercy."] 
 
 11. Ver. 8. "Here occurs a lesson concerning 
 slavery, in reference to which we must hold, that 
 it may be regarded as belonging to the law of 
 nations, but cannot be considered as belonging to 
 the law of nature, because man was created and 
 born for a state of liberty, but slavery is the pun- 
 ishment of sin, as is evident from Gen. ix. 25, where 
 slavery was legally imposed upon Ham, who is, as 
 it were, the patriarch of slaves." Forster. — [Ser- 
 vants have ruled over us. Clarke : " To be 
 subject to such is the most painful and dishonora- 
 ble bondage : — 
 
 Quid domini fadant, avdent cum talia fares f 
 
 Virg. Eel. Hi. 16. 
 ' Since slaves so insolent are grown, 
 What may not masters do?'"] 
 
 12. Vers. 11-14. "We see by means of a pas- 
 sage relating to the Jews of that same period, 
 when women begin to be haughty and virgins 
 proud, that they are brought to dishonor and 
 shame (Is. iii. 16-24). We see and learn also, 
 when princes and chief men and the nobles in a 
 land and nation boast of their position and worth, 
 what perchance sometimes happens to them on 
 that account. . . . Likewise when the old men 
 or elders in the gates, or in their courts, let every 
 sort of unrighteousness go free and for the sake 
 of reward and gifts pervert the right, and yet 
 will not allow their jurisdiction to be amended, 
 as the elders in Judah would not be rebuked by 
 the Prophets, then we see and learn, what follows 
 thereon, that God lets the court and court-houses 
 at last be reformed by the warriors with the 
 broad axe, that court and judges may be con- 
 verted, and court-houses lie in dust and ashes. 
 
 . . . Further, if the young men make too much 
 of their sports, and young women of their songs 
 and dances, we see and learn that God can cast 
 the instruments of music out of their hands, and 
 change their songs and dances into woful lamen- 
 tations, as happened to the wilful youth among 
 the Jewish people : to those who, before the Baby- 
 lonish captivity, treated that matter loo lightly, 
 misused their music in their feasts and entertain- 
 ments, so that the Prophets, Isaiah in his fifteenth 
 chapter, Amos in his sixteenth, as also Jeremiah 
 and others, were compelled to preach against it 
 with all their might. But because their preach- 
 ing was not heeded, God sent the Babylonians, 
 
 who stopped their proceedings, so that their pipes 
 fell into the ashes, and their stringed instru- 
 ments into the dirt, and they at Babylon had to 
 hang up their harps on the willow-trees that 
 were there, as is said in Ps. cxxxvii., and to 
 carry instead of them mill-stones and wood, till 
 they stumbled and fell under their burdens." 
 
 EOID. HUNNIUS. 
 
 13. Ver. 13. " The children fell under the 
 wood. The reason for this, according to our 
 explanation was, because they were unwilling to 
 believe on the Christ hanging on the wood. 
 Hence one of the Apostles says. The cross is 
 foolishness to the Gentiles, and to the Jews a 
 stumbling-block. So then, they fell down under 
 the wood, because they were unwilling to ac- 
 knowledge that life which hangs upon the wood in 
 order to destroy death." Paschasius IuGhisler., 
 p. 218. 
 
 14. Ver. 14. Music. "Music is an unsuitable 
 mode of expression for grief." Another saying of 
 Rhabanus in Ghisler., p. 221. [And one wholly 
 unworthy of repetition; especially impertinent 
 as a comment on a lyrical dirge that sanff its 
 sorrows with the accompaniment of musical in- 
 struments. The young men gave up their merry, 
 jovial songs, to stand weeping around their aged 
 Prophet, as he poured out the lamentations of 
 the church, in measured cadences, that added 
 the melting pathos of music to his words and 
 helped to relieve their swelling hearts of some of 
 their tumultuous grief. — W. H. H.] 
 
 15. Ver. 16. The crown is fallen from our 
 head. " When the church loses the grace of faith, 
 her crowning honor falls from her head, because 
 she exchanges the Lord of glory for the perfidy of 
 falsehood. But that the Lord is indeed the crown 
 of the church, Isaiah testifies, when he says, ' In 
 that day the Lord of hosts shall be a crown of 
 glory and a diadem of joy to the residue of His 
 people' (Is. xxviii. 5). . . . Virtually the crown 
 on our head vanishes, when His good-will is lost. 
 In reference to which the Prophet sings in con- 
 gratulatory strains, ' With the shield of Thy good- 
 will Thou hast crowned us, Lord,' Ps. v. 13 
 (12)." Paschasius. [Calvin: "By the crown 
 of the head he no doubt understands all those 
 ornaments, by which that people had been 
 adorned. They had a kingdom and priesthood, 
 which were like two luminaries or two precious 
 jewels; they had also other things by which the 
 Lord had adorned them. As, then, they were en- 
 dued with such excellent things, they are said to 
 have borne a crown on their head. But a crown 
 was not only taken for a diadem, — it was also a 
 symbol of joy and of honor ; for not only kings 
 then wore crowns, but men were crowned at wed- 
 dings and feasts, at games also, and theatres. 
 The Prophet, in a word, complains that though 
 many ornaments did belong to the people, yet 
 now they were denuded of them all : The crou-n, 
 he says, has fallen from our head."] — "We can 
 use this plaint to-day, not inappropriately, with 
 regard to the condition of the Roman empire ; 
 and that it may be restored, by Divine favor, to 
 its integrity and splendor, we should devoutly 
 pray." Forster. 
 
 16. Ver. 16. The crown has fallen from 
 our head. "Here arises a question. How can 
 this be reconciled with the promise or prophecy 
 
194 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 of Jacob, in Gen. xlix. 10? . . . The Rabbins 
 have given it as their opinion, that the prophecy 
 of Jacob must be understood thus, — The sceptre 
 shall not depart from Judah, until the king of 
 Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, comes, who will cast 
 down the sceptre of Judah. To this we answer, 
 firstly ; That their banishment was only a punish- 
 ment for an inconsiderably short time. . . . 
 Again it happened, that after the Babylonish 
 captivity they had again their own regent in their 
 own country. . . . Besides, God so wonderfully 
 ordered it, that in the midst of the Babylonish 
 captivity this sceptre of Judah made itself plainly 
 visible. Whereas Daniel and his companions, 
 who were of the royal lineage, and also of the 
 house of David, were not only elevated to high 
 position at the Babylonian court, but Daniel was 
 appointed at Babylon one of the chiefest princes 
 over the whole land (Dan. iii.). . . . Add to this, 
 that Jehoiachin, the king of Judah, must be 
 raised up again from the dust, and honored and 
 treated as a king." Egid. Hunnius. 
 
 17. Ver. 16. [Woe unto us, that ■we have 
 sinned! Calvin: "When we are pressed down 
 by adversities, Satan will excite us to sorrow, 
 und at the same time hurry us on to rage, except 
 this doctrine comes to our minds, that we have 
 to do with God, who is a righteous Judge. For 
 the knowledge of our sins will tame our pride, 
 and also check all those clamorous complaints, 
 which the unbelieving are wont to utter when 
 they rise up against God. Our evils, then, ought 
 to lead us to consider God's judgment and to con- 
 fess our sins," — Scott: "As wasting wars, terri- 
 ble famines, and heavy oppressions or persecu- 
 tions come upon nations, for the sins of former 
 and present generations, when their appointed 
 measure of iniquity is filled up : so the accumu- 
 lating sins of a man's whole life will be punished 
 with tremendous vengeance at last; except he 
 obtain an interest in Him, ' who bare our sins 
 in His own body on the tree.' The wrath of God 
 turns the sinner's mirth into mourning, his liberty 
 into bondage, and his honor into disgrace : for 
 this the crown is fallen from our heads, and woe 
 unto us that we have sinned!"] 
 
 18. Ver. 17. " Rightly is the heart said to be 
 made sorrowful on account of sin, because where 
 iniquity takes possession of the heart and bur- 
 dens it, it is no longer the habitation of the Holy 
 Spirit; but the whole mind is obscured by the 
 mist of sin, while the grace of the Most High 
 Paraclete disdains to shed abroad its enlighten- 
 ing influences in that mind. For the Holy Spirit 
 of knowledge flees from deception (Jictum, i. e. 
 jicluram, fraudem), and wisdom will not enter a 
 malevolent soul." Rhabanus, in Ghisler., p. 221. 
 
 19. Ver. 18. The foxes vralk upon it. — 
 *' The same fate which Mount Zion formerly ex- 
 perienced, many Mount Zions, i. e. churches, ex- 
 perience to-day, which a few years ago were 
 enthusiastically devoted to the Lutheran faith, 
 but now, alas for their wretchedness! the foxes 
 run about them destroying the vineyards (Cant. 
 
 ii. 15)." FORSTER. 
 
 20. Vers. 19-21. " After Jeremiah has related 
 copiously and in detail all his own sorrows and 
 those of his people, he closes at last with a 
 prayer, to be a lesson to us, that we should do 
 likewise. And as Jeremiah did not permit him- 
 
 self to be deterred from prayer by his own sina 
 and those of the people, which were more in 
 number than the sands of the sea, nor frightened 
 from it by the grievous wrath of God; so we 
 also, neither on account of our sins, nor yet be- 
 cause of the wrath of God, should restrain 
 prayer." Wiirtemb. Summarien. 
 
 21. Ver. 19. Thou, O LORD, remainest 
 forever. " His is an eternal continuance. But 
 that Being (Esse) which exists, is that Being 
 (Esse), in which the Father in the Son and the 
 Son in the Father exist, so that they have a com- 
 mon eternity and are essentially one forever." 
 Paschasius in Ghisler., p. 223. [Fadsset: 
 " (Ps. cii. 12). The perpetuity of God's rule 
 over human afi'airs, however He may seem to let 
 His people be oppressed for a time, is their 
 ground of hope of restoration." — Calvin: "When 
 we fix our eyes on present things, we must ne- 
 cessarily vacillate, as there is nothing perma- 
 nent in the world ; and when adversities bring 
 a cloud over our eyes, then faith in a manner 
 vanishes, at least we are troubled and stand 
 amazed. Now the remedy is, to raise up our 
 eyes to God, for however confounded things may 
 be in the world, yet He remains always the same. 
 His truth may indeed be hidden from us, yet it 
 remains in Him. In short, were the world to 
 change and perish a hundred times, nothing could 
 ever afl'ect the immutability of God. There is, 
 then, no doubt but that the Prophet wished to 
 take courage and to raise himself up to a firm 
 hope, when he exclaimed, » Thou, God, re- 
 mainest forever.' By the word sitting or remain- 
 ing, he doubtless meant that the world is gov- 
 erned by God. We know that God has no body, 
 but the word sitting ia to be taken metaphori- 
 cally, for He is no God except He be the Judge 
 of the world."] 
 
 22. Ver. 19. [Thy throne from genera- 
 tion to generation. Calvin: " The throne 
 of God designates the government of the world. 
 But if God be the Judge of the world, then He 
 doeth nothing, or sufl'ereth nothing to be done, 
 but according to His supreme wisdom and justice. 
 .... The throno of God is set in opposition to 
 chance or uncertain changes which ungodly men 
 dream of; for when they see things in great con- 
 fusion in the world, they say that it is the wheel 
 of fortune, they say that all things happen 
 through blind fate. Then the Prophet, that he 
 might not be cast down with the unbelieving, 
 refers to the throne of God, and strengthens 
 himself in this doctrine of true religion, — that 
 God nevertheless sits on this throne, though things 
 are thus confounded, though all things fluctuate; 
 yea, even though storms and tempests mingle as 
 it were heaven and earth together, yet God sits 
 on His throne amid all these disturbances. How- 
 ever turbulent, then, all the elements may be, 
 this derogates nothing from the righteous and 
 perpetual judgment of God. This is the mean- 
 ing of the words ; and hence fruit and benefit 
 may be easily gathered."] 
 
 23. Ver. 20. Wherefore dost Thou forget 
 us forever? "Not that God could have lost 
 the treasures of memory or of knowledge; but 
 because He delays, on account of some hidden 
 purpose, to render aid immediately, while He 
 seems to contemn those wh» pray to Him and 
 
CHAP. V. 
 
 195 
 
 offers no consolation to their hearts. ... By 
 reason of human frailty, the mind burdened 
 with troubles thinks God forgetful. For forget- 
 fulness closes the fountain of charity, quickly 
 takes away the faculty of compassion, blunts the 
 edge of the grace that is to be conferred, and 
 does not allow immediate assistance to those who 
 are placed in misery." Paschasius in Ghisler., 
 p. 224. [Calvin : " He seems here to expostulate 
 with God ; but the faithful, even when they pa- 
 tiently bear their evils, and submit to God's 
 scourges, do yet familiarly deposit their com- 
 plaints in His bosom, and thus unburden them- 
 selves. We see that David prayed, and no doubt 
 by the real impulse of the Spirit, and at the same 
 time expostulated, ' Why dost Thou forget me per- 
 petually?' Ps. xiii. 1. Nor is there a doubt but 
 that the Prophet took this complaint from David. 
 Let us, then, know, that though the faithful 
 sometimes take this liberty of expostulating with 
 God, yet they do not put off reverence, modesty, 
 submission, or humility. For when the Prophet 
 thus inquired why God should forever forget 
 His people and forsake them, he no doubt relied 
 on his own prophecies, which he knew had pro- 
 ceeded from God, and thus he deferred his hope 
 until the end of the seventy years, for that time 
 had been prefixed by God. But it was accord- 
 ing to human judgment that he complained in his 
 own person and in that of the faithful, that the 
 affliction was long; nor is there a doubt but that 
 he dictated this form of prayer to the faithful, 
 that it might be retained after his death. He, 
 then, formed this prayer, not only according to 
 his own feeling, and for the direction of those of 
 his own age ; but his purpose was to supply the 
 faithful with a prayer after his own death, so 
 that they might flee to the mercy of God. We 
 now, then, perceive how complaints of this kind 
 ought to be understood, when the prophets asked 
 'How long?' as though they stimulated God to 
 hasten the time; for it cannot be, when we are 
 pressed down by many evils, but that we wish 
 help to be accelerated; for faith does not wholly 
 strip us of all cares and anxieties. But when 
 we thus pray, let us remember that our times are 
 at the will and in the hand of God, and that we 
 ought not to hasten too much. It is, then, law- 
 ful for us on the one hand to ask God to hasten; 
 but, on the other hand, we ought to check our 
 impatience and wait until the suitable time comes. 
 Both these things the Prophet no doubt joined 
 together when he said, Why skoiddest Thou ■per- 
 petually forget us and forsake us?''~\ 
 
 24. Vers. 21, 22. "Since the people in their 
 prayer longed so earnestly for their fatherland, 
 that they might be permitted to return home 
 again, we should take example from this, in 
 what fashion we should yearn after the heavenly 
 fatherland, out of which we have been driven by 
 sin and transgression, and thrust into this empty 
 Babylon of a sinful world. ... In Ps. cxxvi. 
 the unspeakably great joy is described, which 
 the Jews will experience when they return again 
 into their fatherland, out of the Babylonish 
 house of slavery and imprisonment. ... If the 
 people of God so rejoiced and exulted with loud 
 shouts of joy, over the return to their earthly 
 fatherland, how much greater joy there will be, 
 when the elect are actually in the great blessed 
 
 home-gathering, brought into the eternal, im- 
 perishable Jerusalem." Eqid. Hunnius. 
 
 25. Ver. 21. " Whom the Lord hath converted, 
 that one will assuredly be saved, 'but whom He 
 hath despised, no man can correct,' Eccl. vii. 13 
 [Vulg.]. But when he says. Renew our days as 
 from the beginning, he seems to ask this, that as 
 from the beginning He made the first Patriarchs, 
 Abraham, Isaac and Jacob devoted to Himself in 
 the plenitude of their faith and love, that He 
 would therefore make them [who offered this 
 prayer] also faithful and devoted to Himself, by 
 bestowing upon them the same gifts, which was 
 promised to them in the advent of Elias, by the 
 Prophet Malachi, as many think (Mai. iv. 5)." 
 Rhabanus in Ghisler., p. 224. 
 
 26. Ver. 21. Turn Thou us unto Thee. 
 "Except by grace no backslider can be con- 
 verted ; because it is of ourselves that we have 
 fallen, but of God that we rise again." Pascha- 
 sius in Ghisler., p. 224. [Henry: "They here 
 pray for converting grace, to prepare and qualify 
 them for mercy ; Turn us to Thee, Lord. This 
 implies an acknowledgment of their own weak- 
 ness and inability to turn themselves, and that 
 the cause of their distance was in themselves. 
 There is in our nature a bent to backslide from 
 God, but no disposition to return to Him, till His 
 grace works in us both to will and to do. So ne- 
 cessary is that grace, that we may truly say, 
 2'urn us, or we shall wander endlessly; and so 
 powerful and effectual is that grace, that we may 
 as truly say. Turn us and we shall be turned; for 
 it is a day of Almighty power, in which God's 
 people are made willing and obedient."'] And 
 •we shall be turned. " When we are con- 
 verted, we are recalled to the beginning of reno- 
 vation; but when that is attained, we will be re- 
 newed." Paschasius in Ghisler., p. 224. Re- 
 new our days as of old. "God has been 
 ready to change His sentence, if thou hadst been 
 willing to change thy wickedness by penitence." 
 Ambrose on Luke, in Forster. [William 
 Lowth: "Do Thou give us the grace of conver- 
 sion and amendment, and then Thou wilt remove 
 Thy heavy judgments, and restore us to that 
 happiness and prosperity which we formerly 
 enjoyed."] 
 
 27. Ver. 22. " He did not utter these words as 
 1 if despairing of the salvation of his people, but 
 ( that he might manifest his excessive grief on 
 j account of the prolonged humiliation and rejec- 
 I tion of his nation. For he saw by the Spirit of 
 I prophecy, that the Jews themselves, at the ad- 
 ; vent of Christ, would not believe. , . . But of the 
 
 ultimate conversion of his nation he entertained 
 no doubt, — but believed most fully that in the 
 seed of Abraham all the families of the earth 
 would be blessed ; in which universal promise 
 themselves also are certainly comprehended." 
 Rhabanus in Ghisler. 
 
 28. Ver. 22. " As long as we wander here in 
 this world, we shall be called upon to observe 
 the condition of the condemned and lost, and 
 when we see it, we will indeed mourn over it. 
 Yet the Church of Christ is everywhere to be 
 found, if men seek her, and she triumphs over 
 all death. In her also many ages perish ; we 
 shall mourn for her in time, but will be comforted 
 in eternity, for our mother is that Jerusalem, 
 
196 
 
 THE LAMENTATIONS OF JEREMIAH. 
 
 which is from above, which is free. She is eter- 
 nal, and those who here suffer for sin and have 
 comfort only in grace, they are citizens of that 
 eternal city." Diedrich. [Scott: "Though we 
 should mourn over the miseries of the world, and 
 the low estate of the Church, yet the true Zion, 
 to which believers are come, cannot be desolated, 
 but remaineth for ever, even as the throne of our 
 God in Heaven. This inheritance cannot be 
 forfeited or alienated ; nor can our mansions be 
 possessed by strangers; or our relation to God, 
 as espoused and adopted into His family, abro- 
 gated: or the liberty, wherewith Christ hath 
 made us free, taken from us; the freeness of our 
 salvation, disannulled; or our joy and glory- 
 ing in Christ, made void. Various tribulations 
 may make our hearts faint and our eyes dim : 
 but our way to the mercy-seat of our reconciled 
 God still is open ; and we may beseech Him not 
 to forsake or forget us ; and plead with Him to 
 turn, and renew us more and more by His grace ; 
 that our hopes may revive and our consolations 
 abound as in the days of old. For the eternal 
 and unchangeable God will not utterly reject His 
 Church or any true believer, whatever our trials, 
 fears or lamentations may be. Let us then, in all 
 our troubles, put our whole trust and confidence in 
 His mercy ; let us confess our sins, and pour out 
 our hearts before Him ; and let us watch against 
 repinings or despondency, whatever we suffer, 
 or witness of the troubles of our brethren ; for 
 this we surely know, that it shall be well in the 
 event with all who trust, fear, love and serve the 
 Lord."] 
 
 29. [Prayer. Calvin: " Grant, Almighty God, 
 that as Thou didst formerly execute judgment 
 so severe on Thy people, — grant, that these 
 chastisements may at this day teach us to fear 
 Thy Name, and also keep us in watchfulness 
 and humility, and that we may so strive to pur- 
 sue the course of our calling, that we may find 
 that Thou art always our leader, that Thy hand 
 is stretched forth to us, that Thy aid is ever 
 ready for us, until, being at length gathered into 
 Thy celestial kingdom, we shall enjoy that eter- 
 nal life, which Thine only-begotten Son has ob- 
 tained for us by His own blood. Amen."] 
 
 HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 
 
 1. Ver. 1. If we say. Remember, O LORD, 
 consider and behold, this supposes that the 
 Lord can, in some way, forget something or not 
 8e6 it. But in fact He is omniscient and omni- 
 present. If then He sometimes, in some way, 
 seems not to know or to see something, this is to 
 be regarded as a test (Priifung) imposed upon 
 us. He would then be awakened, as it were. He 
 would be urged to think of these things and to 
 look upon them. This reserve on the part of 
 God has a twofold design. He would thereby, 
 first of all, bring us to a knowledge of ourselves. 
 For then only will we urge another, who will not 
 hear us, with unceasing importunity, to render 
 us assistance, when we find that we have not in 
 ourselves, even with our utmost exertion, the 
 means of relief. Secondly, God would thereby 
 prove our faith. Compare the parables of the 
 unjust .Judge (Luke xviii. 2-8) and of the friend 
 who knocks at mi<lnight (Luke xi. .5-10). On 
 
 this text, therefore, a sermon might be preached 
 with reference to The wise purposes which God hat 
 in view, when He long closes His ears to our prayer. 
 He would by this means, 1. lead us to self-know- 
 ledge ; 2. try the strength of our faith. 
 
 2. Vers. 1-7. These verses would afford a text, 
 in times of severe chastisement by the hand of 
 foreign enemies, for a sermon on the theme. The 
 cry of need of a people severely oppressed by an 
 enemy. 1. This is a cry justified by the facta 
 (vers. 2-6). 2. A penitential cry (ver. 7). 3. A 
 believing cry (ver. 1). 
 
 3. Vers. 8-16. On these verses also a sermon 
 could be preached in the days of a great national 
 calamity brought about by the oppression of the 
 public enemy. The thought might be extracted 
 from these verses, that the separate items of suf- 
 fering correspond with the sins that have been 
 perpetrated [per quod quis peccat, per idem puni- 
 tur et ipse. Wisdom of Sol. xi. 16). Theme: The 
 just judgments of God. I. What they consist in. 
 
 I. Because we allowed ourselves to be ruled by 
 our sins, now servants rule over us. 2. Because 
 we despised the bread of life, which was freely 
 and generously proffered to us, we must ourselves 
 seek, with great difficulty, to get our daily bread. 
 3. Because we hungered not after righteousness, 
 we must now suffer great pain from bodily hun- 
 ger. 4. Because we crucified not our lust and 
 passions, our wives and daughters are become 
 the victims of the lusts of others. 5. Because 
 we honored not our old men and rulers, our 
 Princes and Elders are now ill-treated by for- 
 eigners. 6. Because the youths and boys would 
 not bear the easy yoke of the Lord, they must 
 now bear the heavy yoke of our enemies. 7. 
 Because old and young had been too much ad- 
 dicted to worldly pleasure, they must now re- 
 linquish all joy, even that which in itself is in- 
 nocent and allowable (vers. 14, 15). 8. Because 
 we have not striven after the crown of life, the 
 crown of earthly honor is dashed from our head. 
 
 II. Whereto they should excite us. 1. To genu- 
 ine lamentation over our sins. 2. To believing 
 invocation of Divine grace and mercy. 
 
 4. Vers. 15, 16. Forster remarks, "These 
 verses afford material for an address to be de- 
 livered in a time of public mourning, or at the 
 funeral of a prince or any man of illustrious 
 merit in the commonwealth, either ecclesiastical 
 or civil." 
 
 5. Vers. 17-22. In times of great internal or 
 external distress of the church, these words 
 would afford a text for a sermon, and the theme 
 thence deduced is. The complaint and consolation 
 of the Church. I. The complaint. 1. The cause 
 of it (ver. 18). 2. The expression of it (ver. 17). 
 II. The consolation. 1. The power of the Lord 
 of the Church is not shaken. 2. He has not 
 rejected His Church forever, but will re-establish 
 it, (a) inwardly, (6) externally. 
 
 6. Vers. 21, 22, and iii. 24-26, preached upon 
 by CuNO Maurice Zimmermann, when pastor in 
 Dobeln ; How God the Lord renews His Church 
 1. Behold with adoration and thanksgiving how 
 He did it in the days of Luther. 2. Behold 
 with rapture and obedience, how He does it 
 in our day. In " My last six official sermons 
 in Dobeln, in the year 1863." Leipzig, Teub- 
 ner, 1864. 
 
Date Due 
 
 MO 2 0^^ 
 
 /■■* •«. 
 
 ^-^: 
 
 mi'/ ^'^ 
 
 i>f«?^22I^ 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 __j^^^0»^^ 
 
 W^F»"2w^Bfti5 I 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 -4