On the other hand, it is equally true that the theory of strophes is not to be refuted by postu- lates ; the evidence of facts must decide. But any one who has convinced himself from the literature of the subject what finely artificial structures, with ever new forms, have been successively proved to underlie the same poems, and after being long forgotten have h.ad their place taken by as artificial successors, will not waive his right to a radical scepticism on this subject. The charm of playing with numbers makes itself felt here al- most more strongly than in the instance of verse ; and the results, the more artistically these work themselves out, as in recent times those of Muller and Zenner, make their impression much more, being carefully printed, upon the eye, than upon the ear. The following .sentences may serve for guidance and caution in this sphere of inquiry.t
(o) Under no conditions must the search for strophes lead to the abandonment of the certainly ascertained unit, the parallel verse, as has been frequently done [e.g. by Uelitzsch, Merx, Diestel). Never must the end of a strophe break up a verse, and the verse, not the stic/ios, must remain the measure of the strophe.
(/3) A great risk incurred by the search for strophes is this, that in their favour the setise of a poem might be divided wrongly and thus the poem receive a wrong interpretation. The endeavour should be to get first at the sense and its pauses, and then to ask wliether strophe-like forms are the result.
(7) We must not obstinatelj' persist in carry- ing through rigorousi}' a division which upon the whole is uniform, such as that into four lines. The possibility is not absolutelj- excluded that it was considered legitimate to interrupt tliis uniformity occasionally by verses of two or of six lines. This practice is assumed by Zimmern for l!ab. poetry (cf. p. 7* footnote *), and, as another instance, it may be frequently noted in the Old Germ, poetry. Hence we must be cautious in the way of excis- ing or of adding lines and verses, upon the ground of the strophic measure.
(S) Conversely, a succession of sections of the most varied extent are not to be called strophes, by a misajiplication of a term which denotes a rhythmic whole. This practice has been frequently followed, and is so still. J
(e) We must not demand strophes everywhere, but must, in the first place, make a distinction according to the ditiercnt species of poetry. That dance-songs such as are found in Canticles should be strophic is not indeed necessary, but is ex- tremely probable ; that the Book of Job should ex-
* Cf. the Otfried strophe of the Old Hii,'h Germ, poetry, which consists of two rhyminjf couplets.
t Cf. earlier statements of the present writer's views in ZATW, I'^-l, p. 4»Pf.,and Aden du gixikine Conijrtt interna- tional den Orientatistet^, L.eyden, 1884, p. 9:if.
I Thus C. A. Bri^'t's (op. cit. p. 30!)) cites, as 'a fine speci- men ' of Old Ej;ypt. strophe-formation, a poem whose twenty strophes exliibit the following number of lines : 12, 14, 8, 7, l:i, 8. 1), 11, 9, 15, 14, 9. Ul, 5, 11, 13, 10. 6, 10. 13. So we find Strophes of from 5 to 18 lines ranged side by side t
POETRY (HEBREW)
POETRY (HEliRE\V)
2 4 a^d l'?42f For here the equiponderance is
leira".uU.:n"oo nmch and doabt wJl be more prudent than blind conlidence ^ 6. Subordinate matters of ^o™- -f, '^'f v"t ^-pH ^^ the other lliin-s we liave spoken of, h.is )~U y been claimed as a mediun. employed
Slal^^dUions-'used to ^l-te a partu^u^^ar
tlov nent of tern.i..al rhyme for poet.eal purposes ^!rrU«enerallpdnutted, rhyme n^ver beca^ne
^^^^^^St;''^'r'm^=",^v^t
\P1 (cited by Sommerf and Ps 6 (cited by Urig.s)
^y serve, altl'ousl' i" "'^'""^'^ '"^''^"'^^ '".Ce Znie satisfactory ^throughout. Here and there
1 1 poet himself may have been conscious of t
and thus indulged in a «I'f '"tf ° , t;^ s^earS in rpilitv the occurrence of rhyme lias scartLi^ ^nv more si "nilicame than attaches to J Chot/.ner s rp>,'n JaS 8, issl) collection from the OT of a & series of the linest dactylic hexame ers In
devices All these phenomena receive exhaustu e tatment t the DisLrtation of I. M. Casano.icz. Paronumasia in the Uld Fc^t., Boston, lbJ4.
That tinullv, Hebrew, like other languages, has in a er'tain nlasure its peculiar poetical vocabu- Ury and g-rannnar is a matter of course, but can be
THF IJI FEIiliXr SPECIES OF POET UV. -\ni\i^ U era ure of iBracl the drama is wlidlv want.Mj^ Thi^ necuUarity it shares with the whole Senui.c U era ure Xreas in that of the Indo-Germanic neon es the drama three times over sprang up nuie fresh and independent from the germ, r lelv m n ian, Greek, and German soil Uus ^m l^r "l s be set down to a certain one^suledncss X i po on, a want of obiectiviiy on tl.e part of H,e sr>i c^ The belief, to \.e sure, has often been ^M:;;:^ Ulat precisely the OT itselfjonns an^ edition to this rule, and that it contains two
tion of lyric (in fact, marriage) songs ;+ in the ca*e
. C, tor early times O. 8o"™«^„Sf ^ ^I'THtIT- KlncrUacomm. i. AT. xvll. (lb«») p. x..fl.