617
The Prototype of the Magnificat.*
By Paul Uanpt.
My soul doth magnify the Lord, Magnificat anima mea
Dominum, is the beginning of the hymn in Luke 1, 46—55. The
Magnificat was used in the daily service of the Church as early
as 560 A.D. It was at first omitted from the American Prayer-
book, but was restored in 1886. Hamack has shown m the Pro¬
ceedings of the Eoyal Academy of Berlin (1900) that the Magnificat
is not the canticum beatae Mariae'^ virginis but the song of
Elisabeth, the wife of Zacharias and mother of John the Baptist.
His paper is entitled Das Magnificat der Elisabeth. The same
opinion was expressed in 1897, in the Revue d'histoire et de
littSr atare religieuse, by Jacobe, which is probably a pseudonym
for Alfred Loisy,* the noted Biblical critic of the Sorbonne, for¬
merly Professor at the Institui catholique, Paris, whose petit livre
on the Gospel and the Church* has attracted so much attention
in Prance. Loisy's L'ivangile et Viglise (Paris, 1900) is directed
against Harnack's Wesen des Christenthums (Leipzig, 1900).
St. Jerome said (about 389 a.d.) in his translation of Origen's seventh
homily on St. Luke : non enim ignoramus quod secundum alios
codices et haec verba Elisabeth vaticinetur.^ The Magnificat of
Elisabeth is the pendant to the hymn in Luke 1, 63—79, com¬
monly known as the Benedictus of Zacharias.'' Both must be
regarded as Greek ' versions of Maccabean psalms,* inserted by
the author (about 100 a. d.) of the Third Gospel, not as his own
poetic compositions, as Hamack supposes.^ The Magnificat is very
similar to the Old Testament psalm, commonly known as the Song
of Hannah, which we find in 1 S 2, 1—10. This prototype of the
Magnificat represents one of the latest additions to the Books of
Samuel, just as the late post-Exilic liturgical hymn for the Passover,
which appears in Ex. 15 as Moses' Song of Triumph, seems to have
been inserted long after the completion of the Pentateuch.
Thenius'theory (adopted by Böttcher) that the Song of
Hannah is a psalm of David, celebrating his victory over Goliath
Bd. LVIII. 40
« s *
618 Haupt, The Prototype of the Magnificat.
and the defeat of the Philistines (1 S 17, 52) is untenable, and
Keil's''^ opinion, that the poem may have been recited by Hannah,
is impossible. Even so conservative a critic as Canon Driver'*
admits tbat the Song of Hannah in style and tone bears the marks
of a later age. Nor do the thoughts appear as the natural ex¬
pression of one in Hannah's position the poem is manifestly
incongruous to the situation it is supposed to illustrate. The tone
of the Song of Hannah (as well as of the Magnificat and the
Benedictus) is national (so Hensler, 1795) rather than individual.
I believe, with Sellin," that the Song of Hannah refers to King
Jehoiachin of Judah, whd was carried captive by Nebuchadnezzar
(597 B. c.) to Babylon where he remained in confinement until
Nebuchadnezzar's son and successor. Evil - Merodach of Babylon,
lifted up the head of Jehoiachin Out of prison (562 b. c.) in the
37* year of his captivity, spake kindly to him, and set his throne
above the throne of the kings that were with him in Babylon.
He changed his prison garments and he did eat bread continually
before him all the days of his life.is According to %* v. 8 of
the Song of Hannah is directed against Nebuchadnezzar and all
the nations that will rule over Israel.
It is a mistake to suppose that the last line of the poem is
a subsequent liturgical addition, although this view is advocated by
Bickell,!'' Klostermann,!' Kuenen,!* Cheyne,^» Löhr,2o K. J. Grimm,-i
and recently by Gunkel in his Selected Psalms. The final couplet,
The Highest in Heaven destroys them, He judges the ends of the eartn, Imparting- strength to His King, exalting the horti 3» of His Anointed,
refers' to Jehoiachin who was regarded as the legitimate king even
in his exile. On tbe other band the third line of v. 8,
For Jhvh's are the pillars of the earth, He has set the world upon them,
which is omitted in (5, must be eliminated as a gloss which destroys
the symmetry of the poem. This excision is favored by Well-
hausen,2« H. P. Smith,*« and Nowack," vvhile Driver (following
* Note the following aDoroviationi: — '.<4= Aquila; — AJSL = .dmertcan Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures, continuing Hebraica (Chi¬
cago) ; — alt. = as an alternative; — AoF = Altorientalische Forschungen ; — KS&T = Akkadische und Sumerische Keilschrif ttexte ; — AT Altes Testa¬
ment; — AV = Authoriied Version; — (i = Ethioplc Bible ; — (B = Greek Bible, (jjA = Codex Alexandrinus, (B^' = Lucianic Recension, ©V = Codex Vaticanus; — 3 {i.e. Jerome) = Vulgate;, — JAOS = Journal of the American Oriental
Society,;— = Journal of Biblical Literature;—JRVC ^ Johns Hopkins
University Circulars; — K = Kings; — KB = Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek; — 1. ■= line, 11. = lines ;— M = Masoretic text ;— MSS = Manuscripts ;— n. = note,
nn. = notes; NT = New Testament, OT = Old Testament ; — RV = Revised
Version; - S=Samuel;— 3 = Peshita;— 2;= Symmachus;—SBOT = rAe Sacred
Books of the Old Testament; —4 = Targum (ed. Lag.); — v. = verse, vv. = yerse3;—ZK— Zeitschrift für Keilschriftforschung;— Z^T = Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft ;— \° = ürst occurrence, 2° = second oc¬
currence; 1 = first edition, * = second edition, &c.
« 5 ♦
Haupl, The. Prototype öf ihe Magnificat. 619
Ewald)"^^ would remove v. 2, and H.P. Smith 2< and Budde*' are
inclined to cancel v. 9°: His oum strength availeth to no one.
This psalmus extra canonem consists of two sections: vv. 1—5
and' 6 —10; each section comprises four couplets, and each conpllet con¬
tains two douhle-hemistichs with 3 -f- 3 beats. The two lines of v. 8,
The bow of tbe mighty is shattered, tbe weali are girded with strength;
So much in haughtiness talis not, nought arrogant come from your month!
must be transposed. The four couplets of each section may be
grouped in two stanzas; cf. my metrical reconstruction- of Moses'
Song of -Triumph in AJSL 20, 155 (April, 1904).
In J. D. Michaelis'** translation the text is printed in lines,
but there is no strophic division, just as in Swete's (5, the Eevised
Version, Budde's edition (SBOT) of the Heb. text, Sievers' Text-
proben (1901) p. 421, and Nowack's commentary.*^ Augusti and
De Wette *^ have a blank line before v. 4, while Palm'" leaves a
blank line before v. 9 (he prints i3"in-bN as a separate line).- Ernst
Meier assumed six stanzas, of 12 lines each, the hemistichs being
broken up into two lines. Ley** printed this psalm correctly in
double-hemistichs** but made no attempt at strophic division or
emendation of the received text ; nor has he given a metrical anal¬
ysis of the poem in his Grundziige or in his Leitfaden.^^
Ewald arranged the song in four stanzas, each stanza consisting
of 8 hemistichs (1: vv. 1-3; 2: 4-6; 3:-7. 8; 4: 9.10); he
omitted v. 2 but retained the third Dibon** of both vv. 8 and 10.
This arrangement was adopted by Driver,^* p. 22. Klostermann^'
followed Bickell in dividing the text into eight stanzas of four
hemistichs, omitting v. 2'' (so, .too, Meier,*' while Bickell cancels
V. 2") and v. 10°, but retaining v. 8"=; Löhr*" states that he arrived
at the same conclusions independently. H. P. Smith** marks off
fom- stanzas, like Ewald,*^ but his division, which is endorsed in
Budde's commentary,*' is different, viz. 1: vv. 1. 2 (7 hemistichs) —
2: vv. 3—5 (4 + 6 hemistichs, with a blank line before v.4) —
3: vv. 6—8 (4 +- 4 hemistichs, with a blank line before v. 8 and
excision of the last two hemistichs of v. 8)—4: yv. 9.10 (7 hemi¬
stichs, with excision of the third hemistich of v. 9). According to
Budde's commentary the arrangement of the text in stanzas with
four hemistichs is untenable; be beUeves that v. 3 begins a new
section, 3*" giving the reason for 3"; also v. 4 is according to
Budde the beginning of a fresh paragraph and cannot be separated
from V. 5. In Eeuss' AT 1, 175'* the translation is given in eight
unequal stanzas, viz. 1: v. 1 (4 hemistichs) — 2: v. 2 (3 hem.) —
3: V. 3 (4 hem.) — 4: vv. 4. 6 (6 hem.) — 5: vv. 6. 7 (4 hem.) —
6: V. 8 (6 hem-)— -7: v. 9 (3 hem.)— 8: v. 10 (5 hem.). In Kautzsch's
Texthibel^^ we find six unequal stanzas: viz. 1: v. 1 (4 hem.) —
2: V. 2 (2 hem.) — 3: v. 3 (4 hem.) — 4: vv..4. 5 (6 hem.) — 5:
vv. 6—8 (10 hem.) — 6: v. 9. 10 (8 hem.). Neither Reuss nor
Kautzsch eliminate any hemistich or double-hemistich.
40*
620 Haupt, The Prototype of the Magnificat.
V. Zapletal, in his recent publication entitied AUtestament-
Itches*^ issued about the end of last year, arranges the Song of
Hannah in six couplets and six single lines : each couplet is followed
by an isolated single line. He adopts my arrangement in douhle-
hemistichs,** but his metrical reconstruction is impossible. Gunkel**
divides the poem into six unequal stanzas, viz. 1: v. 1 (4 hem.) —•
2: vv. 2. 3 (6 hem.)— 3: vv. 4. 5 (6 hem.)— 4: vv. 6—8 (10 hem.)
_5: vv. 9. 10» (6 hem.)— 6: v. 10" (2 hem.). He considers v. 1
to be introductory and believes that the last two hemistichs of
the poem may represent a subsequent liturgical appendix.
- N. Schlögl !* divides the poem into four stanzas, each consisting
of four lines with 3 + 3 beats. The last line is according to
Schlögl a subsequent (Messianic) appendix; it vFas not sung by
Hannah, like the preceding lines, but added by the compiler of the
book at a time when David had been elected by God to be King
of the Chosen People and ancestor of the Messiah; the words refer
not only to David, the prototype of Christ, but to our Savior Himself.
All these strophic divisions are unsatisfactoiy. As to the
traditional stichic arrangement in the Hebrew text, it is very bad,
much worse than it is in the Song of the Sea (see AJSL 20, 154).
Por instance, in v. 1 the blank space should be before TVai, not
after it; in the same way there should be a blank space after
'SiiN, not before it; the scribe evidently did not like to leave a
blank space at the beginning and at the end of the line; he also
disregarded the blank space in the middle of the line; cf. vv. 2.
S". 5. 6. 8» "=. 9"=. Ginsburg*' has no stichic arrangement, just as
the text is printed in prose in Lagarde's but Bser states on
p. 93 of his edition, Qralia Hannae in codd. scriptum est in
forma cantici, ut Exod. 15.
I subjoin a metrical reconstruction of the Hebrew text and
a metrical English rendering,** followed by some critical and ex¬
planatory notes.
A,i rn'bN'a -sip mp'n nTn^a ^ab ybs
i-jPiSiTSia inn7:ir{} ["c] -"aiiN-by [] ann 1
•.irribsD 1-1^
imb'?» i:an2 'Vbi
npiD fflTip V'f" {"5} 2 3"
mn"' niyi bN-is
n'a» ibnn n^ay-n
;ribb7:N a^ra nan
■nail:: nnba ü^yaTi:
rjya-a nnbi nnp^y 5
Haupt, The Prototype of the Magnificat. 621
B, iii :by"i biNio TiiTO
IT 1 I
: 07:1172I PN'V' ' biElDM'
tJi'i"' n2isi<73S'
:()Dbn3i ni33 nsdt
rfnm rT»7a7a mni 6
I - ( I
-111235731 ioii'i':3 mm 7
I I 1
blII"ncy73 oip)3'i 8 Dian: Dy aiiomb
iv Tail l^jna niyiom
':'i'i'aii7a 'nni' mni
17312J1 I'l'-iion ibai 9 I "^nasi nba Nb-ia
(y)y-)iS-iDBN li'li N iJi 1
:im©73 pp dS'ii
Dy,"-i:' 0173103 'I'i'i'by 10 labTsbI tyI ipii' ■••I
nnSia 3» (|S)
»is 9 {»)
-p^a 'bs' •j-s"s 2l> (a)
ban DH'bj p^ji -psij nirrV—s 8o (y)
The Song op Hannah.
(1 S 2, 1 — 10)
1 Through Jhvh my heart exults, 'my Qod' exalts my horn;'"
I shout wide-mouthed over enemies,*" I joy in Thine assistance.
2 No deity is there like Jhvh,« no Rock like our own God;
S" A God omniscient is Jhvh, 'by Him' (our) deeds are weighed.
3* So much in haughtiness^ talk not, 'nought' arrogant come from your mouth 4 The bow's of' the mighty are shattered, the weak are girded with strength.
6 The rich are drudges*' for bread, the hungry cease 'from their labor'.
The barren woman bears seven, the fruitful mother withers.
6 Jhvh makes dead and alive,*^
7 Jhvh makes poor and makes rich,
8 From dust He raises the lowly.
And makes him sit among nobles,
He sends to Hades and back again;*' abases and sets men on high.
from rubbish*' He lifts up the needy, and glorious thrones he inherits. ()
9 He watches the feet of His faithful,**
His own strength availeth to no one,^
10 'The Highest' in Heaven'destroys' them.
Imparting strength to His King,**
tbe wicked are silenced in darkness;
it is Jhvh who shatters his foe's'.
'He' judges the ends of tbe earth, (■)■) exalting the horn'" of His Anointed*'.
(or) 2b there is no 'God' beside Thee (^) 3a haughtiness
(y) 8<5 For Jhvh's are the pillars of the earth, He has set the world upon them
\ö) 9 man
622 Hauipt, The Prototype' of the Magnificat.
Critical Notes on the Hebrew Text.
V. 1.— For Jt mma 2° (omitted in 5) at the end of the
second hemistich read TibNa, following (5 iv Oeö fiov, 3 in Beo
meo, and several Heb. MSS (so Wellhausen, Klostermann, Driver,
Kautzsch, Löhr, Oort, Budde," Nowack, Zapletal, Gunkel, Schlögl^*).
The rhythm of the first hemistich of the second line is im¬
proved by transposing M ^c, following (J'*' inXarvv&r] in ix&QOvg fiov TO aTOfia (WV (but (5^^ inlarvv&r} rö fftdfAa (lov in ii&QOvg
liov). This transposition is adopted by, Wellhausen and Nowack;
contrast Löhr, Budde, and Zapletal. Z. reads laiiN-by ann,
with recessive accent, but this is not rhythmical. 'The first syllable of a line shotild, as a rule, not be accented.
For the recessive accent in id la^iN instead of la^lN , cf. "iiTN b^n (v. 4*") and in^i (and "j-ip D"i.ii) in the last Une'of the poem, also yiN ipiSM in the gloss v. 8"=; see Gesenius-Kautzsch, § 29, e ; cf. also ini -nois and "^nn nasrn in ip 2, 2. 12.
Jül ID at the beginning of the last hemistich of v. 1 should
be transposed and prefixed to the beginning of the first hemistich
of V. 2 (so (6^); cf. Norbert Peters,*« p. 191 and Schlögl,^* p. 8;
contrast Klostermann.
Ül "^nsnOia has two beats; cf. my rem»'-''« on the Song of
Lamech, AJSL 20, 164.
y. 2.— For Jl TOnp see my note on Ex.15, 11 (AJSL 20,161).
Jl ^nba ID (3 neque enim aZiks est extra te) is a gloss
(or variant*) to the first hemistich; so Meier, Klostermann, Löhr,
N. Peters, Oort, Sievers, Budde, Nowack, Zapletal, Gunkel, Schlögl.
Before Jl -jnba (5 OM»t V^) we must insert lanp (following
(S OVK lOTiv uywg nkr^v aov, which appears in (6 as third hemi¬
stich) or, with Budde (SBOT): bs {cf 2 S 22, 32). N. Peters
suggests b?3. ■ H. P. Smith's readings (following ®) pins v'*"""^
ir^nbSD for there is none righteous like our Ood and "nir V'*"'
■inba and there is no rock beside thee (Bickell, Unser Gott nur
Fels ist, Heilig nur Jehova) are not good. N. Peters thinks that
Jl "na is a corruption of the abbreviation 'is = p^iiS (contrast
■Löhr and Nowack). Budde, on the other band, remarks that (6
Slxatog is derived from miswritten for N. Peters reads:
irnbND pins v^*"! mniD isinp V'' ; also Zapletal and Schlögl
read p^ia instead of Jl ns.
V. 8.— I have stated in my paper on Moses' Song of Triumph
(AJSL 20, 169) that the two ü^bwi of v. 3 must be transposed:
3" and 2 go together, while 3» belongs to v. 4.
• Cf. Crit. Notes on Kings (SBOT) p. 213, 1. 48.
t For this interchange between tho second and third persons cf. my Ternaries on the last line of the Song of the Sea, AJSL 20, 163.
Häuft, The Prototype of the Magnificat. 62S
For the intensive plural my?, {cf. AJSL 20,160, ad Ex. 15, 5
and JAOS 22, 10) we must not, with Grätz, substitute the singular
rwi. ÖS>^ yvnOEcog, but (5*^ yvwcewv.
^For the K^thib Nb we must substitute the Q*re lb; the K'thlb
may' be an intentional pessimistic alteration; ef. Eccl. 9, 2. 11. 12;
8, 14. 10; 7,'15—18 and Crit. Notes on Kings (SBOT) p. 216,
1. 13; see also ■my reinarks on the reading mu aia instead of
"TN»t ^its oil p. 247 of my paper on Ecclesiastes in Oriental
Studies (Boston, 1894). According to Klostermann and N. Peters
the Q«re lb is secondary.
It is not necessary to read: (Oort, pmbby) mbby 'jah bNi,
following (5 v,al d-ebg stoifid^av ((E J'fl'T',^ A" .') iicizriStvfUiT«
avrov ((5^ avx6v); so Siegfried-Stade, Kautzsch, Löhr, H. P. Smith,
N. Peters, Nowack, Schlögl. Budde is inclined to think tljat the
original text was (inbby or) mbby pn irTibNi; this is adopted
by Zapletal. Klostermann's reading nüjp-mbby i:rn:"Nb (which is
supposed to mean: Thaten des Bogens geben keinen Ausschlag)
spoils the meter. Palm's rendering Nicht können halten sich die
frevlen Thaten! and Reuss' translation Und Frevel bleiben nicht
ungestraft (lit. werden nicht ausgeglichen) are untenable. 5 JJo
«0)Q»,jo Jfc^j ® n^nn -^nnaiy ba byi; S, nai ovk
elal Ttaq avroi TCQoepdßeig.
Ül n-aa 2° (omitted in ffi^) must be canceled (but not ia"in,
H. P. Smith; or iianr, Sievers, alt.). Klostermann's nna; iriias
(Ex. 32, 18) is impossible. Ewald, Redet nicht viel stolzes, stolzes;
Kautzsch (following Wellhausen) Sagt nicht immer: Hoch hinam!
Hoch hinaus! (accusative of direetion). The repetition of nnaa
is not intentional (Driver); it is simply due to dittography (Löhr,
Budde, Nowack, Zapletal, Schlögl) ; contrast the emphatic repetition
of ID Nb in 1/; 1 4; see my remarks in AJSL 19, 131. 5 has
simply JfcoVo» {d Ofl.JP't'.') but ^ ]aiai pnai.
.ül bN should be repeated before Ni:i (so, correctly. Ley,
p. 172, n. *); cf n. 23 to my paper on i^; 1 in AJSL 19, 138.
(5 has fll] siel&ccrco, (E (DA..E97\.', B jOQSJj |Jo, ® ]ipE'' Nb.
.iW DD'-BJi ppy NJf cannot mean Nur Schein geht aus von
eurem Mund! (Palm). ® renders: ■jioi'^''^ OD.^ .' {7C .').
In Assyrian the stem pny means not only to progress but also
to transgress. Z, dvofila; 'A, (lixaqaig {cf. (iträqatog = proud,
haughty).
V. 4.— Insertion of ^3 at the beginning of this verse im¬
proves the rhythm and is necessary if we transpose the two D''biS'3
of the preceding verse.
t Heb. "INU was pronounced UU; see Crit. Notes on Kings (SBOT)
p. 282, 1. 4. ■
624 Haupt, Tke Prototype of the Magnificat.
M DTin 01133 nep cannot mean Bogen-helden »ind bestürzt
(Ewald, Keil) or Die Helden mit dem Bogen sind verzagt (Palm).
We must read, with Grätz, nrittjp for M map, and rinn or mnn
(not nnn, H. P. Smith, Oort, Zapletal; or mn, Klostermann) for
M ü'^nn, following 5 ^^L&J Jv^iis^^J JlfcJuö, ^ Nia-.aT nniDp
Vnan- ■-SIT'* (AKV, The bows ofthe mighty men are broken);
contrast Driver, Lohr, Budde, Nowack. Schlögl reads: D-«niBp
"inn Dnaa the powerful archers (Gen. 21, 20) were discouraged
(Schlögl refers to Is. 21, 17; 22, 3; 37, 27; Jer. 46, 6); but this
is impossible. We can hardly believe that (ß rö^ov dvvar&v riaQi-
vtiasv read nnn {i e. nnn) ; ija&ivriaev cannot be transitive {ao&evim for &a&ev6oa) although d renders (DAji?''Qö^ '. *t>fl'l' I JP
:. This would be in Assyrian^ qaSta qurade unniS. Heb.
nnn ö-iiaa nhiop would be: qaSati (cf dalati = Heb. nhVn)
qurade isbir (ytS, cf. = u^iS>!) or uparrir (cf. Jst); cf.
Hos. 2, 20 and the Esarhaddon Prism B, col. 1, 1. 23 (see AJSL 4,
148, 1. 23; KB 2, 142, and my translation in Drugulin's Mark¬
steine (Leipzig, 1902) p. 63. In Assyrian the reflexive of the
intensive stem, Utannis, or (with kJL*!) UtenniS is both transitive
and intransitive; cf. Gesenius-Kautzsch, § 52, k. (H ijff'&ivTjffev
v. 4 might be due to the iia&kvriaiv at the end of v. 5; in v. 10,
however, (5 uses not cLO^tvovv, but aa^evfj noieiv.
For the recessive accent in b^n titn see above, on laiN
(v.l«).
Y. 6.— H. P. Smith's llDn instead of ül nsto (S O'^jl./)
is gratuitous. Nor can we accept his conjecture y-iN iBT' for
M ibnn. The first two hemistichs of v. 5 are mistranslated
in (6 nliiqii? aqxmv 't}Xcctxd)&rjaav xal aa&evovvxeg naQfjKuv yfjv.
S has for Jl iy nbnn D-iayii: — o»Lo/ Jiäoo the Hungry have
2}lentg.
According to Driver, Jl iy means even (Kautzsch, /a).
N. Peters suggests n'y again; cf. M ny for n'y Job 1, 18 and
Grit. Notes on Kings (SBÖT) p. 223, 1. 43. Jl ny was connected
with the preceding ibnn as early as 1777 by J. D. Michaelis who
rendered: Und die Hungrigen feyren (== feiem) auf immer.
Zapletal's reading nyb is no improvement. We must read nh?
instead of ny, following Reifmann, Klostermann, Budde, Löhr, Oort,
Nowack, Gimkel, Schlögl. Driver mentions Reifmann's emendation,
but does not adopt it (contrast Budde's statement in his commen¬
tary). Grätz retains Jl ny, but inserts n'ay before it; cf. my
remarks on the emendation of 2 K 19, 27 in Grit. Notes on Kings
(SBOT) p. 282, 1. 1.
* That is, Antiochus Epiphanes and his successors.
Haupt, The Prototype of the Magnificat 625
The second büJ72 of v. 5 seems to be based on Jer. 15, 9
(Budde) just as we find in (S before tbe last two double-hemistichs
of V. 10 an illustrative quotation (cf. AJSL 20, 163, 1. 1) of six
hemistichs borrowed from Jer. 9, 23.
2 JSA^.CD0 JLiS- ji.W^O misunderstands the numeral n»aizj.
£Si nbbWN does not mean mourns — nba« (so Bickell, Sieg¬
fried-Stade, i/öhr, Budde, Nowack, Zapletal) or bleibt verlassen
(Reuss, S fc^Jj) but withers (so J. D. Michaelis, Ewald, Keil,
Klostermann, Kautzsch, Gesenius-Buhl). AV waxed feeble; EV
languisheih (so Brown-Driver-Briggs) ; Augusti and de Wette , er¬
mattet; Gunkel, verzweifelt; (E, correctly, ri^J^ I (DA..^ "•
V. 6.— We need not read nbyai (Budde) instead of Jt by^i.
• IT
V. 7.— It is better, however, to read ia"'T'n (Budde, ffliltt)
instead of Jl ffl-'-nn {cf. Crit. Notes on Kings, SBOT, p. 259, 1. 29)
imless we prefer to explain iB''"ntt as an analogical formation.
Instead of Jl CIN we may read, with Zapletal, following
5a:, qNL
"T. 8.— In the same way we may read nsONMi instead of
M. nBiZJNU, following <5®S (jKidOO ^o); so H. P. Smith, Budde,
and several Heb. MSS.
But we need not read Da'^UJiMb, witb Schlögl, instead of
Ül 3-'TOinb, foUowing % iinmamNb, 5 p>->) p»v\ ; or oy-iaiiD-ny
(so Grätz, H. P. Smith, Budde, Zapletal) or D-'Hy-'a-'nrDy, following
(Si^ fierce dvvccOT&v Ici&v {(^^ Iccov) instead of Jl D-iaina ny, 5
loVo» )a\; or (with Winckler, AoP 2, 240) i-aa (« (DJP(DC
: Cf^'iCk Z. : 51-flC :) instead of Jl maa in the foui-th
hemistich. Zapletal is inclined to read the plural n"''T'aD. Gf.
my remarks in AJSL 20, 171, 1. 18.
For the recessive accent in yiN ■'pSU (Ewald, -^^ p. 159, n. 1:
Griinde) in the gloss v. 8", which belongs to v. 10, see the note
on -D ia""!« (v. 1).
Sievers' reading 'alem or V2''by for Jl Drfby is gratuitous;
cf. AJSL 20, 163, 1. 5. 5 renders this double-hemistich :. >^
■^^-OJL v^OjA^ )QQDO '.Mj CVO^Q^ j-*»»; cf my paper on
the beginning of the Babylonian Nimrod epic, JAOS 22, 10.
<5 omits the last two hemistichs of v. 8 and the first two
hemistichs of v. 9, inserting between the fourth hemistich of v. 8
and the third hemistich of v. 9 (which is really the first hemistich
of V. 10): didovg evfiiv x& eixofieva, xcl evldyrjoev irrj öixulov =
fna"' a-'p-'ns m:fflif it'i nrb -in:. According to Wellhausen, '
Driver, Löhr, H. P. Smith, Budde, this variation represents an
attempt to accomodate the Song more closely to Hannah's position ;
626 Haupt, The Prototype of the Magnificat.
but it is probably an illustrative quotation (AJSL 20, 163, 1. 1)
which crept into the text from the margin, just as the illustrative
quotation (Jer. 9, 22. 23) inserted in (S before the last two a-'b\D73
of the poem. According to Klostermann and Nowack the lines
were perhaps inserted to fill up an illegible passage ; cf. Crit. Notes
on Isaiah (SBOT) p. 84, 1. 34; p. 152, 1. 3, and the English trans¬
lation of Isaiah (in tbe Polychrome Bible) p. 209, 1. 35 • also Crit.
Notes on Kings (SBOT) p. 178, 1. 22.
Zapletal inserts this illustrative quotation in his reconstructed text.
V. 9.— The last hemistich of v. 9 must be combined with the
first hemistich of v. 10 (so, correctly, Klostermann, Kautzsch, Nowack,
Zapletal, GTinkel. The piDB r|iO of v. 9 should be after vai-in.
Ley*^ p. 173 arranged v. 10 in five hemistichs.
It is not necessary to read, with Schlögl, inba, following 3
tn fortitudine sua, instead of Ül nba. '
Jl TS'N after -laa-i is a gloss ; cf. my reading of Cant. 8, 7
in AJSL 19, 22. Por the impersonal construction see Crit. Notes
on Kings (SBOT) p. 289, 1. 20.
y. 10.— Jl at the beginning of this verse does not mean
surely, as Zapletal states.
The suffix in Jl la-^n^i refers, not to Min-', but to the man
who boasts of his own strength; therefore imn- cannot be casus
pendens, but we must read lai-in nm mrri, following Thenius,
Wellhausen , Klostermann , H. P. Smith , Nowack , Schlögl ; contrast
Driver, Löhr, Budde, Zapletal, Gunkel. Oort reads n-'n"! (from
mn = nnn).
The Q«rS T»ai"in is preferable to the K«thlb ia-'-i73 (Kloster¬
mann, Gunkel: ia'^IW, following (5 Kvgiog acQ'ivfi jroiijffsi tov
dvzlSinov avrov); cf. the plural suffix in ny'Ti in the following
hemistich and $ n^i^rb NiosaNb vui^pn Naai -^bya nani mn-'.
On the other hand, Ct read at the end of the fourth hemistich
instead of ® xarcxirj^ovoficov avzoii; (= Jl nbn:-') the singular
aiT& (J'cdCi^ :)
Before the last two double-hemistichs of the poem (5 inserts
{cf. N. Peters, p. 18) an illustrative quotation derived from the
Heb. text of Jer. 9, 22. 23. Driver compares tbe addition in (&
i|; 14, 3 = Kom. 3, 13—18. In tbe present passage the translator
used q>Qovifi6g instead of aotpog (Jer.) and ävvarög instead of
iaxvQog (Jer.). (B"', however, reads öogsog for ipqövifiog and ia^vgog
for övvccrög in the present passage. The phrase xal yivaOntiv ori,
iyco eijit KvQiog 6 noiäv eksog xat nqifia in Jer. appears in
the present passage as xat yivtoOKSiv rov Kvqiov, xccl nomv nqlfia,
adapted to the context of the Song of Hannah. For the same
reason the conclusion in Jer. 9, 23, ott Iv rovroig rb ^ilrjiuc (tow,
Xiyei KvQiog is omitted. This conclusion, however, seems to he
a subsequent addition in Jer.
Haupt, The Prototype of the Magnificat. 627
The Heb. text of Jer. 9, 22. 23 is composed in a different
meter : the lines have not 3 + 3 beats, as in the Song of Hannah,
but 2 -f- 2. The te.xt should be .arranged as follovrs:
innDna nan bbinni bn''
1 I I r
im-iaaa naa" bbnn-' bsi
I ' . I I
nicya bbnni bx'i'
■ I I
bbnnMn bbnni nt*Ta DN-ia
I ' o ' '
niJTi ■'iN-ia Pyi-ii baian
!'''''npii£T'r aDia73I lott l.l nto
nini_t:t<5 -r^tn n!>sa-:(tf)r^s= (7) "i^'« ((3) nirr' iss (a)
These two triplets were not composed by Jeremiah, cf. Duhm ad
loc. and contrast Comill (SBOT) p. 26. Of. also my metrical
reconstruction of the triplets in Jer. 17, 5—8, AJSL 19, 133.
(5 KvQiog ayiog, which precedes this illustrative quotation in
the Septuagintal version of the Song of Hannah, is an explanatory
gloss to KvQiog in the preceding hemistich, caUing attention to
the fact that KvQiog refers to Jhvh, not to the King; cf. 110, 5
where KvQiog (■':nN) refers not to Jhvh but to Zerubbabel; see
JHUC, No. 114 (July, 1894) p. 110^ d adds after y-iN --ODN:
7\fl<^: >lr?'^:ar7\'t: = «in pnx ^a. several (S MSS
read dtxortog wv.
For M lbs (Qore vby) read, with Thenius, Fürst,* Budde,
Nowack, Zapletal, Gunkel, Schlögl, '-{'vby (not la^by, Grätz, fol¬
lowing .3 super ipsos, B ^^ojA^, ® prriby) and cy'li (cf. 'tjj 2, 9)
for Ül 0»1^ (Reuss, er verdonnere sie vom Himmel her!) following
Budde, Nowack, Zapletal, Schlögl. Klostermann retains Ül Dri:,
(8: tl'p-ü-i DT bpa HV2i: ytz inn^by) but reads nbi» (foUowing (5 avißr))
instead of Ül iby; cf. Lagarde, Semitica (Göttingen, 1878) p. 8.
For Üt mrfl at the beginning of the following hemistich
read Nim ((E (DQJ'X't .') following ® avrog (so, correctly,
Klostermann). But we must not, with Sievers, read: ■|i'T'-Nin
y-iN ■ ■'CEN ; the pronoun Nin is not pi-oclitic, but iden is un¬
accented , as in 2, 8: yiN-iOEN ^mriNi ; cf. my remarks in
in AJSL 20, 164, n. 2; and for the omission of mrr' see ibid.,
p. 160, ad V. 3.
* Cf. Perles, Analekten, p. 29.
628 Äaupt, The Prototype of the Magnificat.
Tois ßaisiXsvaiv r\^äv J\.i1V^^i \) = liiabö in¬
stead of Jl nsbnb (3 o>C^'o\, ^ niDbnb) is by no means ganz
ungehörig (Klostermann). Heb. D-'sbn may mean the great king;
cf. the remark on nisn (v. 3).
The rhythm is improved by reading avi for Jl DT'I (Grfttz,
n-i-i-'i); but tbese jussives are mere 'rhythmical jussi ves'rc/". Crit.
Notes on Proverbs (SBOT) p. 53, 1. 7, and contrast Budde's com¬
mentary on the present passage.
NOTES.
(1) Read at the meeting of the American Oriental Society in
Washington, April, 1904.
(2) Por the etymology of the name Mary see AJSL 20,
152, n. *.
(3) See H. Köstlin's article in Herzog - Hauck's Realencyclo¬
pädie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche, third edition
vol.12 (Leipzig, 1903) p. 71; cf. the Addenda, ibid. p. 819 and
his paper in ZNT (Giessen, 1902) p. 139 ff.
(4) German translation by Joh. Grifere-Becker (Munich, 1904).
Cf. Loisy's Autour d'un petit livre.
(5) The original reading in Luke 1, 46 was neither jtal tlntv
Maqiuft,, nor xat tlntv Ehaaßtr, but simply xat tlntv, just as
(ftv has in 1 S 2, 1 ((t CD^n. :) for Jl -,nNm nsn bbonn
((6^ -f xat nQoarjv^am). Cf. Crit. Notes on Kings (SBOT) p. 72,
1. 42.
(6) The naiölov in Luke 1, 76 originally referred to Israel ;
vv. 76—79 is not a Christian addition to an original Jewish
Messianic song; ncudlov may be an editorial adaptation for naig
= nay; see the following note.
(7) Some Maccabean psalms may have been originally com¬
posed in Greek; cf. my remarks on ip 45 in AJSL 19, p. 136,
n. 11, last paragraph and JHUC, No. 163 (June, 1903) p. 54*.
(8) Job Ludolf printed the Song of Hannah in his edition
of the Ethiopic Psalter (Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1701) p. 325, pre¬
ceded by Moses' Song of Triumph (Ex. 15) and the Song of Moses
(Dent. 32).
(9) See Professor Irving P. Wood's paper, T^g dovktjg in the
Magnificat, Luke 1,48, in JBL 21 (1902) 48—50. Trjg Saving
avTOV is an editorial adaptation of an original rov 6ovlov avrov
= nay, or twv dovlav avrov, i. e. Israel; cf. ip 136, 22. The
Magnificat must be divided into 2 sections: vv. 47—50 and
51—55; each section comprises two couplets: 46—88; 49. 60;
51—53; 54. 55; each couplet consists of two double-hemistichs.
(10) See my paper on Moses' Song of Triumph in AJSL
20, 154.
Haupt, The Prototype of the Magnificat. 629
I (11) Otto Thenius, Die Bücher Samuels (Leipzig, 1842);
second edition, 1864.
(12) C. F. Keil, Die Bücher Samuels, second edition (Leipzig,
1 1875). The same view is expressed by Dr. Nivard Schlögl, Die
Biieher Samuels (Vienna, 1904) p. 11, in the new Catholic com¬
mentary on OT, edited by Professor Bernbard Schäfer, of Vienna.
(13) S. R. Driver, Notes on the Heb. Text of ihe Books of
Samuel (Oxford, 1890) p. 21; c/l his Introduction to the Literature
of the OT-' (New York, 1898) p. 174.
(14) See my paper cited above, in n. lu, p. 167, n. 29.
(15) See Critical Notes on Kings (SBOT) p. 305, 1. 50.
(16) Gustav Bickell, Dichtungen der Hebräer (Innsbruck,
1882) 1, 33.
(17) August Klostermann, Die Büclier Samuelis und der
Könige (Nördlingen, 1887) p. 5.
(18) Abrabam Kuenen, Die historischen Bücher des AT
(Leipzig, 1890) p. 48.
(19) T. K. Cheyne, Origin ofthe Psalter (London, 1891) p. 57,
note e. In his Critica Biblica, part 3 (London, 1903) Cheyne
has no notes on 1 S 2, 1—10.
(20) Max Löhi-, Die Bücher Samuels (Leipzig, 1898) p. 12
(third edition of Thenius' commentary); cf. above, n. 11.
(21) K. J. Grimm, Euphemistic Liturgical Appendixes in the
OT (Baltimore, 1901) p. 3.
(22) Hermann Gunkel, Ausgewählte Psalmen (Göttingen, 1904)
p. 238. According to Gunkel the Song of Hannah is certainly
pre-ExiHc (Ley considered it to be archaic). Similarly he believes
(p. 16) that lp 2 was composed in the 7*'' cent. b. c. and (p. 95)
that 1^ 45 may refer to Jeroboam II (783—743 b. c); contrast
my notes on ■^ip 2 and 45 in my paper The Poetic Porm of the
First Psalm, AJSL 19, pp. 134—136; see also the translation of
■J^' 2 in JHUC, No. 163, p. 91 and my remarks ibid., p. 54», above.
I believe that t^^ 2 was prefixed to the Psalter out of deference
to Queen Salma Alexandra under whose reign (76—67 b. c.) the
final redaction of the Psalter seems to have been concluded; cf.
Duhm, Die Psalmen (Freiburg i. B., 1899) p. xii. We know that
the Pharisees were well pleased with Salma Alexandra. Her first
husband was Aristobulus whose coronation as King of the Jews
(104 B. c.) is glorified in ip 2. The first psalm, it may be supposed,
is a subsequent Pharisean addition; it may have been prefixed to
lp 2, which was originally tbe first psalm (Acts 13, 33'*) in the
collection, at a later date (possibly after 100 a. d.) although it
was probably written about 153 b. c. It was originally not intended
as proem to the Psalter.
* Cf. Pauli de Lagarde Novae psalterii Graeci editionis specimen
(Göttingen, 1887) p. 16.
4 6
630 Baupt, The Prototype of the Magnificat.
(23) J. Wellhausen, Der Text der Bücher Samuelis (Göttingen,
1871).
(24) H. P. Smith, The Books of Samuel (New York, 1899).
(25) W. Nowack, Die Bücher Samuelis (Göttingen, 1902).
(26) H. Ewald, Die Dichter des Alten Bundes, part 1, first
half, second edition (Göttingen, 1866) p. 158.
(27) K. Budde, Die Bücher Samuel (Tübingen, 1902j.
(28) J. D. Michaelis, Deutsche Ubersetzung des AT, mit An¬
merkungen für Üngelehrtc, part 5, second half (Göttincren, 1777).
(29) J. 0. W. Augusti und W. M. L. de Wette, Die Schriften
des AT, vol. 2 (Heidelberg, 1809)
(30) A. Palm, Alt-Hebräische Lieder (Zurich, 1881) p. 71.
(31) Ernst Meier, Die heilige Schrift des AT, part 1 (Stutt¬
gart, 1850) p. 8.
(32) J. Ley, Die metrischen Formen der hebr. Poesie (Leipzig,
1866) p. 172; cf. his Grundzüge des Rhythmus, des Vers- und
Strophenbaues in der hebr. Poesie (Halle, 1875) and his Leitfaden
der Metrik der hebr. Poesie (Halle, 1887).
(33) See AJSL 20, p. 15,_n. ♦; 19, 194, n. **; cf A. E. Cowley
and Ad. Neubauer, The Original Hebrew of a Portion of Eccle¬
siasticus (Oxford, 1897) p. xiü, J. 6 and H. L. Strack's edition, Die
Sprüche Jesus', des Sohnes Sirach's (Leipzig, 1903) also Origen's
scholion ad 119, 1, quoted in Paul Vetter's Metrik des Buches
Job (Preiburg i. B., 1897) p. 2, n. 1 (cf ZAT 11, 214) and Norbert
Peters' Bücher Samuel (Preiburg i. B., 1899) p. 175.
(34) Ed. Reuss, Das AT, 1 (Braunschweig, 1892) p. 175.
(35) E. Kautzsch, Textbibel des Alten und Neuen Testaments
(Preiburg i. B., 1899).
(36) It is interesting to note that five of the twelve articles
in the book of tbe learned Dominican critic deal with subjects
discussed about a year ago by myself and my students, e. g. the
Ephod (see JBL 21, 1—47; H. J. Elhorst, De Ephod in 'Theol.
'Tijdschrift, 1904, pp. 158—177); David's Dirge (see JHUC, No. 168,
pp. 53—57); Psalm 2 (see AJSL 19, 134; JHUC, No. 163, p. 90);
Isaiah's Parable of the Vineyard (see AJSL 19, 193—202); but
Zapletal's book contains no reference to my papers published in
AJSL and JHUC. Zapletal has discovered a number of things
which I pointed out more than a year ago, e. g. ia ipö3 = kiss
the ground (see AJSL 19, 134) &c., but we must, of course, believe that he arrived at his conclusions quite independently.
(37) Christian D. Ginsburg's Massoretico-Critical edition of the
Heb. Bible, published by the Trinitarian Bible Society, London 1894.
(38) The rhythm of my translation has been much improved
by the kind cooperation of the distinghuished co-editor of the Poly¬
chrome Bible, Horace Howard Purnoss.
(39) Lit., My hom is exalted through my God, that is, I
triumph; cf. the bilingual text published in my ASKT 81,22:
Haupt, The Prototype of the Magmficat. 631
z'na berisunu kima rtmi rabi qamäSu ittandsl (Sumer. muruba-
bi-a am-gal-gim a-hi mi-nin-il-il) 'in the midst of it he lifts up
his horns Hke a great wild bull' (Num. 23, 22; Deut. 33, 17); see
iny translation in my Akkadische Spraehe (Berlin, 1883) p. 35
= Transactions of the Fifth International Congress of Orientalists
(Berlin, 1881) part 2, first half, p. 283; cf. A. H. Sayce's Hibbert
Lectures (London, 1888) p. 480, 1. 26, and Friedrich Hrozn^-, Mythen
von dem Qotte Ninrag (Berlin, 1903) in Miuheilungen der Voi-der-
asiatischen Gesellschaft, 8, 201, 1. 22. In his comments on this
text Dr. Hrozny has disregarded the 'apologetic remarks' (Bezold's
Catalogue of the K Collection, p. 35) in ZK 2, 273. See also
my remarks in the Crit. Notes on Kings (SBOT) p. 283, 1. 40
and the conclusion of my paper on the introductory lines of the
cuneiform account of the Deluge in JAOS 25 (1904) 74.
(40) Lit., My mouth is enlarged over mine enemies (so AV).
(41) Lit., Hire themselves out for bread {cf. AV).
(42) This does not refer to resurrection, as Budde and Zapletal
suppose ; it means simply, Jhvh may deliver His faithful out of
the most extreme danger, a man who is 'sick unto death' may
recover, a man who is condemned to death or imprisonment for
life may be pardoned (like Jehoiachin); cf. Thenius, Keil, Löhr,
Reuss ad loc, also KAT 3, 639, n. 1 and Gunkel, p. 236. Himmel¬
hoch Jauchzend , zum Tode betrübt does not refer to ascension
and death.
(43) AV, dung-hill (J. D, Michaelis, Feldstein). W. R. Smith
in his Lectures on the Religion of the Semites, new edition (London,
1894) p. 235, n. 1 calls attention to the fact that in an Arab
encampment slaves sleep beside the blood and the dung {Agh. 8,
74, 29). H. P. Smith ad loc. remarks. The näöN is the mound
of rubbish which accumulates near an Oriental town. Beggars
often spend the night upon it in default of a lodging. Cf. Wetz¬
stein's note on the 'iliy mazbala of villages in the Hauran, in
Franz Delitzsch's commentary on Job 2, 8, second edition (Leipzig,
1876) p. 62, n. 3. Tbe American equivalent would be dump or
dumping ground. A euphemism for nis;^N {}wr\ ^t^) is oipU
■mna = Assyr. aSru ellu ; cf. my paper Rabylonian Elements in
the Levitic Ritual (JBL 19, 55) and Bsentsch and Bertholet ad
Lev. 4, 12; 6, 4; see also the translation of Lev. 1—5 in JHUC,
No. 114 (July, 1894) p. 113 and n. 13 ibid., p. 115. Jft >^Em in
ITUnn "^DU) is, of course, not a corruption of hduj, but corresponds
to the Assyr. .sipku 'accumulation, heap.' Heb. 'oftal' is
identical with cL*.^.* For the partial assimilation of the original
m to the s {dasin for dasim) see Crit. Notes on Isaiah (SBOT)
* Arab. yXs qidr 'pot' appears iu Assyrian as diqaru; sae n. 101 to
my paper Jiabyl. Elements in the Lev. Ritual in JBL 19, 77.
632 Haupt, The Prototype of the Magnificat.
p. 133, 1. 25; Kings, p. 192, 1. 21 and the cross-references there
given. According to W. Robertson Smith non is an Aramaic form
for nciS; the « is a tSj (see my remarks, ZDMG 34, 761) =
= L {cf. ^Ouiil* oiiS = iLS:^! lgUj>). The original
stem is ^DiOi (cf. 'i^iXi.^ tUS!); the prefixed n is secondary. For
the vowels of the Q*re in nph cf Crit. Notes on Kings (SBOT)
p. 122, 1. 11.
(44) Cf my remarks on 1, 6 in AJSL 19, p. 141, n. 44.
(45) King Jehoiachin of Jndah (562 b.c.); cf AJSL 20, 167,
n. 2. The terms "ibn and r\-"m refer to an individual, not to the
Congregation. In the same way iDbW i|; 2, 6 refers to Aristobulus
(104 B. c). Contrast Löhr and Nowack ad loc. According to
Budde and Schlögl the King is the Messiah.
* See p. 631 note *.
633
Phönizische Namen auf "j'^UJ.
Von Franz Fraetorins.
Häufig sind im Phönizischen einige theophore Namen, die als
zweites , nicht theophores Glied ']b*i5 aufweisen. Besonders häufig
ist "^Vlisbya, das inschriftlich als BaXaMrix umschrieben erscheint, dann "^VuJinüN; endlich (wenn sicher?) "^Vö«;':«) C. I. Sem. No. 1273.
Von jeher hat die Erklärung des zweiten Gliedes ernste Schwierig¬
keiten gemacht, und man hat sich meist nicht anders zu helfen
gewußt, als durch die verzweifelte Annahme, daß "^biB = nbiB sei ;
s. Schröder, Phöniz. Spr. S. 200, C. I. Sem. zu No. 50 und 132.
Clermont-Ganneau hat im Rec. d'arch. orient. Bd. I, S. 165 f. auf
arabisches j^SoL« hingewiesen, das im heutigen Magrebinischen die
Bedeutung »retten' entwickelt hat. (Vgl. auch Landberg, Proverbes
y
et dictons, vol. I, S. 385 u5JL»o se tire d'affaire.)
Ich möchte die fraglichen Namen an die wohlbekannten, völlig
durchsichtigen Namen Dbüjbya und cVfflJWN knüpfen. Sie sind
von letzteren gebildet durch Antritt des caritativen k (ZDMG.
Bd. 57, S. 533 f.), wobei das radikale m schwinden mußte, "^b'jj
der Eigennamen steht zur Wurzel obiu also in dem gleichen
Verhältnis, wie b3T der Eigennamen zur Wurzel nar (Bd. 57,
S. 532, 794).
Ob die vereinzelten und unklaren Namen "jbybya No. 619,
"^aNnay No. 1018 etwa dasselbe k enthalten, bleibe ganz dahin¬
gestellt.
Bd. LVIII.
4 6 *
4t
