STOP
Early Journal Content on JSTOR, Free to Anyone in the World
This article is one of nearly 500,000 scholarly works digitized and made freely available to everyone in
the world by JSTOR.
Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other
writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the
mid-seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries.
We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this
resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non-commercial
purposes.
Read more about Early Journal Content at http://about.jstor.org/participate-jstor/individuals/early-
journal-content .
JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people
discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching
platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit
organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please
contact support@jstor.org.
THE REFERENCE TO TREIXIS-WORK IN
PSALM 74, 5
A MERE glance at this verse reveals numerous difficulties. To
begin with the first word JHV scarcely yields a suitable meaning,
and in spite of all attempted emendations and interpretations, seems
to be out of place, as there is no noun in this verse which can be
subject of this verb. It was perceived, made known, it was seen,
are suggested renderings which have nothing to recommend them.
Then the second word N'SDS is taken by some of the versions as
a noun, something like KfcOS. 1 And even when one has succeeded
in recasting the text in a more or less Hebraic form, the simile
conveyed is so feeble as to be out of harmony with the tenure of
the rest of the verses, where the Psalmist employs the strongest
terms in describing the cruelty of the enemy. Nor is the lexical
difficulty of the expression of J»y ^3?3 to be lost sight of. In all
other places where tpD occurs it either stands alone, as in Gen.
t :
22, 13; Jer. 4, 7, or is followed by "IJ£, as in Isa. 9, 17. For j»y
is never used in Hebrew in the sense of forest, and as 7|3D in our
text must denote a thicket, if the ordinary interpretation be
adopted, the singular p$t can scarcely be appropriate. In the fol-
lowing verse neither the keKb njTl nor the kere FlV\ is suitable
for the context, as the Psalmist obviously describes an event which
took place in the past. It is therefore no wonder that modern
commentators are almost unanimous in declaring this word to be
corrupt. Some take it to be the ending of a longer word such as
1 LXX has rr]V etcodov, and Jerome's rendering is in introitu. The
variant readings zi-odov and exitu are probably due to the confusion of
Nl'30 and NSIO.
T T
585
586 THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW
nyppO- Ehrlich in reading DS1 for 1"|JJ1 should have advanced a
step further and deleted the 1 in order to make any sense at all,
for there is no possibility of taking this clause as a circumstantial
one. Although the copyists sometimes confused N with 5J (comp.
I Kings I, i8&, 20), the fact that the Psalmist throughout this
Psalm does not use the accusative sign JIN, despite the circumstance
that in almost every verse there is a determinate noun in the
accusative, is sufficient ground to reject this suggestion.
The solution, I believe, lies in the correct interpretation of
the expression yy 713D3 which in this case ought to be rendered
in the wooden trellis-work. No simile is intended in this verse, but
a vivid description of what actually took place. The form of tI3D
t :
or 7PD is certainly fi'al, with the original a remaining, as in Arabic
and Syriac, or heightened to o, as is usually the case in Hebrew.
In I Kings 7, 17, where the decorations and furniture of Solomon's
Temple are described, the form D'ODb occurs which is conceivably
a plural of 'iPD, and the ordinary form rDSb* is probably a nomen
unitatis of this word. It would thus be identical in form and
meaning with Arabic sibak "net-work, trellis-work." In verse 5
of this Psalm we would require to emend the text slightly and
read K'ln:) or K'qns instead of N'303. It is also probable that
N13D3 of the versions may be retained as a nomen verbi, as in
the case of VDDpl Num. 10, 2. The corruption of this word very
likely arose through the misunderstanding of the expression tpD3
YV- For when these words were taken to mean a thicket of trees,
the whole verse had to be explained as a simile, and hence the
participle was substituted for the infinitive. The ketib in verse 6
would be retained, and read flVI. Here again the Massoretes had
to punctuate this word jnjTl in order to make this verse follow the
preceding one with some logical sequence.
Having thus restored the text, we should translate the two
verses as follows: Let it be known when axes were brought above
in the wooden trellis-work, and when they struck down all its
carvings together with hatchet and axes. The Psalmist, according
to this interpretation, draws the attention of the reader to, or per-
PSALM 74, 5 — HAMPER 587
haps invokes God ( tPJS? may be understood) against, the wanton
cruelty and ruthlessness of the enemy. He brings to the mind a
vivid picture of the spitefulness of the oppressor who used all
kinds of iron instruments, with the sole object of vexing the
vanquished. The trellis-work of the Temple could have been de-
stroyed quite easily without any instruments, especially as after-
wards the Temple was entirely burned down. But the conqueror,
to aggravate the mortification of the conquered nation, defiled all
that was holy, and knowing, perhaps, that the Hebrews avoided the
introduction of iron instruments when building the Temple or
erecting an altar (comp. I Kings 6, I and Exod. 20, 25), he mocked
them by demolishing the ornaments and decorations with hatchet
and axes. One cannot help noticing that in this Psalm the author
complains against the insults and effrontery of the impudent
enemy. He asks God to remember that the enemy reproaches the
Lord, and a worthless nation provokes His name (vv. 18, 22).
It is now necessary to explain to what kind of wooden trellis-
work the Psalmist refers. One's mind naturally turns to rt33B >
T T :
mentioned in I Kings 7 and in the parallel passages of Chronicles.
But the trellis-work mentioned there was certainly of metal, and
played a minor part in the Temple, for it did not belong to the
building itself, but to the furniture and decorations of the Temple.
Thus if the ordinary translations and commentaries are to be relied
upon no wooden trellis-work existed in Solomon's Temple. There
are, however, in the First Book of Kings, chapter 6, a few passages
which have not been rightly understood. ng^pO (6, 18) has
hitherto been taken to mean carving, and the verb ySp has been
translated he engraved, carved. Despite the apparent consensus of
opinion in this respect, I venture to question the philological
soundness of this interpretation, as there is no evidence to support
it. Were VPp^ to have that meaning, it would stand isolated in
Hebrew without a parallel in the cognate languages and dialects.
Even in Hebrew this signification of J?^p would be confined to
these obscure passages. And this circumstance in itself is sufficient
to arouse suspicion. Nor does the context demand this explanation.
In Hebrew J?^ has two well-established meanings. In the first
588 THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW
place it denotes he threw, slung, and occurs several times in the
Old Testament, both as a noun and verb. In Arabic, Syriac, and
Ethiopic the noun in various forms is of frequent occurrence. The
same root with another signification is to be found in D'VPp
curtains, hangings (Exod. 29, 9, etc.). For in that verse it is
evident that the radical meaning must be he wove, plaited, twisted,
intertwined. With such a signification this verb is frequent in
Neo-Hebrew, and is attested in Arabic by the occurrence of
kila'at(un) "a sail." Fraenke! 2 takes kil'(un) to be a loan-word,
but the form kilU'at(un) which does not occur in any other dialect
would tend to prove that it is a genuine Arabic root. The explana-
tion of Gesenius that the idea underlying kil'(un) and the other
meanings of V^P * s wavering, is precluded by Hebrew D'SDp, as
pointed out above. For JJpp. > s so called, not because it hangs and
waves, but on account of the way it is made.
All the cases where the verbs and nouns occur being taken into
consideration, it would appear that this root should be recognized
in Hebrew with only two meanings: (1) he threw; (2) wove,
plaited. The common ground for the origin of these significations
is probably the idea of removing from one place and inserting
into another. With some modification this idea is present in all
the significations in the cognate languages. In Arabic kala'a (I and
VIII conjugations) = he removed, uprooted, eradicated. The
meaning he disentangled is required in J Asci.' £jv ( &-J' 1J4 kJlJuiU
<>S j (jl ,!»-*■*> oJj ^•J^'i ^* Cl>* The forefeet of my horse
got stuck among the stones. I alighted from it, disentangled its
forefeet, and mounted it again (Ibn Batutah's Travels, Vol. IV,
p. 9, edition of Defremery and Sanguinetti). Thus even here the
idea is not merely uprooting, but taking out the foot from among
the stones and placing it on the smooth part of the road. Out of
this the notion of throwing, slinging could have naturally devel-
oped, especially when the one who threw aimed at something. A
parallel case is to be found in Arabic salaka "he inserted" and
Hebrew ivbtyn "he threw." So also sabaka in Arabic = "he
2 Die aramaischen Fremdworter im Arabischen, p. 224.
psalm 74, 5 — halper 589
inserted, intertwined," and in Syriac asbek(Afel of sbak) some-
times = "he threw," and is chiefly used metaphorically in the sense
of "attacked" (comp. Hebrew bsinn Gen. 43, 18). Thus we have
harba (h)u ger ba'e denarme uenasbek nasa bahdade "He wishes
to arouse strife (lit. sword) and throw men against one another,"
i. e. to set one against another (Homilies of Isaac of Antioch,
Bedjan's edition, p. 456, 1. 12). In a similar way it is not hard to
follow how the idea of "weaving" developed, for in weaving it is
necessary to remove from one place and insert into another. And
here again one may be permitted to quote the parallel of Arabic
sabaka "he inserted," "wove," and Syriac asbek "he threw."
Now the meaning he wove, plaited, intertwined suits JDP in I
- T
Kings, chapter 6, quite as well as carved. We ought to translate
D«rc n«sw aypB nybpo no^a rvan bit, Wl And the cedar
wood inside the house was an intertwining of gourds and out-
spread flowers. According to this interpretation the ornaments
were not carved out in the walls, but attached to them as a kind
of appliqui, and hence they may rightly be called trellis-work, since
they were intertwined.
It is these ornaments that the Psalmist had in mind.
Jersey City B. HauER
