In William Wordsworth’s “Preface to Lyrical Ballads,” he describes good poetry as the spontaneous overflow of emotion. He goes on later, however, to describe how the poet must train his emotions through much reflection and deep contemplation. Wordsworth describes a true poet as one who uses language that is common to everyday people; the poet is “a man speaking to men.” Even though Hebrew poetry does not necessarily correlate with our modern understanding of poetic forms, especially in translation, it does still carry a “natural rhythm and flexibility that marks all true poetry” (Johnson 1378). Hebrew poetry of the Bible, which is the focus of this paper, is characterized by “action, imagery, simplicity, vigor, and concreteness” (Muilenburg 671).
Historically, Biblical Hebrew poetry has not always been acknowledged as poetry. According to Johnson, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, and Song of Solomon were the only Old Testament books thought of as poetry until the 19th century. Actually, approximately one-third of the Old Testament is made up of poetry. Large sections of the prophets are written in poetic style. There are even significant poetic passages in the books of law and history (1377).
Hebrew poetry, as does the poetry of most cultures, has its roots in music. According to Muilenburg, poetry was most likely chanted to the sound of musical instruments. The Psalms, for instance, have musical instructions in the superscriptions, which are at the beginning of each psalm. Also, rhythmic speech could have been linked with divine inspiration, considering the fact that prophets sometimes prophesied with the accompaniment of instruments (672). According to R. K. Harrison, the majority of ancient Near Eastern cultures were rich with musical, therefore poetic, ability (76).
The Hebrew language is well suited for poetry for several reasons. First, the language is naturally given to assonance due to the fact that in Hebrew pronouns attach to the verb and pronominal modifiers attach to the noun (Muilenburg 671). This natural assonance gives the language a soothing, flowing sound that sounds poetic by itself. Hebrews used a variety of other literary and rhetorical devices like simile, metaphor, alliteration, synecdoche, paronomasia, and merismus, to name a few (Limburg 528). In addition, according to Johnson, the Hebrew language does not have many words for abstract ideas, but is rich in concrete images. “In Heb. Poetry ‘the heavens declare the glory of God’ (Ps 19:1) in a most literal way” (1379).
Despite the fact that the large amount of progress that has been made recently in analyzing the nature of Hebrew poetry, the endeavor began about 2000 years ago. According to Harrison, Josephus and Philo of Alexandria are the earliest written accounts of the analyzing of Hebrew poetry. They were actually the first to recognize sections of poetry outside the Hagiographa. Sadly, they tried to apply a unique Greek poetic style upon poems in the Pentateuch. The first recognition of parallel forms in Hebrew poetry did not come about until the medieval period. Ibn Ezra and Kimchi, in particular, made the observation, “but in general the phenomenon was either ignored or misinterpreted by Jewish and Christian exegetes” (77).
Then came Bishop Robert Lowth. He focused the attention of the scholarly world on what he called parallelism, the main feature of biblical Hebrew poetry. In his Lectures on the Sacred Poetry of the Hebrews, Lowth said, “The correspondence of one Verse, or Line, with another I call Parallelism” (qtd. in Berlin’s “Parallelism” 155). Lowth has revolutionized the modern understanding of Hebrew poetry.
Although many strides have been taken since his work, the basic principles of the parallelism that he described are still the basis for most scholars’ work. According to Muilenburg, Lowth identified three basic forms of parallelism: synonymous, antithetic, and synthetic. Each instance of parallelism is comprised of two basic parts (672). Synonymous parallelism is being used when both parts say essentially the same thing with slightly different wording. Example: “When Israel went out from Egypt, / the house of Jacob from a strange people” (Ps. 114.1) Antithetic parallelism is when the first and second parts make a point using contrasting terms. Example: “The blows of a friend are faithful; / But the Kisses of an enemy are treacherous” (Prov. 27.6). Synthetic parallelism is more of an association in stucture between different propositions than it is a correspondence of words. Here is an example: “The blows of a friend are faithful; / But the kisses of an enemy are treacherous” (Eccles. 11.2). Today, however, most scholars reject synthetic parallelism as a form of parallelism (Harrison 78).
Since Lowth, scholars have identified several other types of parallelisms. According to Berlin, a chiastic parallelism the order of terms is reversed from the first part to the second. Example: “Proclaim in Judah; / And in Jerusalem announce” (Jer. 4.5). Staircase parallelism is where the first line is repeated in the second with added words (156). Example: “Awake, awake, Deborah; / Awake, awake, chant a song” (Judg. 5.12). Berlin goes on to say that an emblematic parallelism is where a simile or metaphor is used in one of the lines. Example: “As a hind yearns for watercourses; / So my soul yearns for you, God” (Ps. 42.2). A janus parallelism “hinges on the use of a single word with two different meanings, one of which forms a parallel with what precedes and the other with what follows” (157). Example: “The blessings of your father / Surpass the blessings of my ancestors/mountains [hwry] / To the utmost bounds of the eternal hills” (Gen. 49.26).
Building on Lowth’s work, scholars continued to look at parallelism in different ways. With the discoveries of vast literary texts from the 14th cent B.C.E. in 1928 at Ras Shamra (Ugarit), scholars ventured to compare Ugaritic poetry with Hebrew poetry (Harrison 83). According to Berlin, scholars realized through this comparison that parallelism was not unique to Hebrew poetry, but was common in other ancient Near Eastern literature as well. Some endeavored to develop word pairs that often appeared together in parallel lines. Ultimately, however, this led to an overemphasis on individual words (“Parallelism” 157).
Scholars have also developed linguistic models to analyze the grammatical nature of parallels. According to Berlin, this approach returned the focus to the line as a whole. Roman Jakobson made the most significant contribution in this field. Geller and Berlin followed in the same line of thought, focusing on the grammatical aspect. Essentially, the grammatical parallelism approach was based largely on transformational grammar. Basically, two parallel lines share the same deep structure, even though it conveys the message with different surface structures (157-58). Example: “Not according to our sins did he deal with us; / And not according to our transgressions did he requite us” (Ps. 103.10). Here, the lines have the same deep structure, which is essentially the core meaning, but different surface structure, which is basically syntax. Scholars have explored other approaches to parallelism, but ultimately Lowth’s work remains the base for any research in parallels.
For most of history, a large part of biblical Hebrew poetry has been mistaken for prose because the ancient Near Eastern concept of poetry differs drastically from the Western view. The Hebrew poets used a wide range of literary and rhetorical devices. The chief characteristic of Hebrew poetry is parallelism, opposed to rhyme and meter in Western poetry. Scholars will continue to build on the work of Lowth among others; they all play a vital role in understanding the nature of Hebrew poetry.
Works Consulted
Berlin, Adele. “Parallelism.” The Anchor Bible Dictionary. v.5 David Noel Freedman, ed. Doubleday: New York, 1992. 155-62.
Berlin, Adele. “Poetry, Hebrew Bible.” Dictionary of Biblical Interpretation. John H. Hayes, ed. Abingdon: Nashville, 1999. 290-96.
Cohen, Chaim. “Poetry.” The Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish Religion. R. J. Zwi Werblowsky and Geoffrey Wigoder, eds. Oxford UP: New York, 1997. 538.
Harrison, R. K. “Hebrew Poetry.” The Zondervan Pictoral Encyclopedia of the Bible. Merrill C. Tenney, ed. Zondervan: Grand Rapids, 1978. 76-87.
Johnson, Philip C. “Old Testament Poetry.”Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia. v.2 John Rea, ed. Moody: Chicago, 1975. 1377-78.
Limburg, James. “Psalms, Book of.” The Anchor Bible Dictionary. v.5 David Noel Freedman, ed. Doubleday: New York, 1992. 522-36.
Muilenburg, James. “Poetry: Biblical Poetry.” Encyclopedia Judaica. v.13 Keter: Jerusalem, 1973. 671-82.
“Poetry.” Dictionary of Judaism in the Biblical Period. v.2 Jacob Neusner, ed. Macmillan: New York, 1996. 490.
