LAMENTATIONS, BOOK OF 215 LAMENTATIONS, BOOK OF
a ilifFerence in the aljihabetical structure (see above) of i and of ii-iv. These objections to Jeremiah's exclu- sive autliorship seem about as tenable as Hardt's Sha- drach, Meshach, Abednego, and consorts. The first two jioints arc not worth consideration ; the third is an- swered by the simple proposition that they are poems, anil not a historical narrative which we have before us, and that therefore a certain license must be given to the poet in the use of broad similes in his gencralizings, and in his putting himself sometimes in the place of the whole people as its spokesman and chief mourner. And if, finally, the structure ditfers in i from ii and iv, then it may as well be asked why iii, which is not supposed to be written by Jeremiah, is like ii and iv, which are al- lowed to be ^\•ritten by him ? If somebody has imitated the structure in iii, why has it not been also imitated in i and vV A further refutation of this attempt to take away two fifths of Jeremiah's authorship — supported by no investigator as we said — has been given by Ewald, and we have indeed only mentioned it for the sake of completeness. Bunsen, it is true {fjott in der.Gesch. i, 420 ), indicates Baruch as probably the author, in part at least, of Lamentations ; but this is evidently a mere con- jecture.
V. Occasion. — The earliest statement on this point is that of Josephus {Ant. x, 5, 1). He finds among the books which were extant in his own time the lamenta- tions on the death of Josiah, which are mentioned in 2 Chron. xxxv, 25. As there are no traces of any other poem of this kind in the later Jewish literature, it has been inferred, naturally enough, that he speaks of this. This opinion was maintained also by Jerome, and has been defended by some modern writers (Usher, Dathe, jNIichaelis, Notes to Lowth, Prsel. xxii [Michaelis and Dathe, however, afterwards abandoned this hypothesis, and adopted that of the later date] ; Calovius, Prolegom. ad Thren. ; De Wette, Einl. in das A. Test., Klagl.). It doss not ap])ear, however, to rest on any better grounds than a hasty conjecture, arising from the reluctance of men to admit that any work by an inspired writer can have perished, or the arbitrary assumption (De Wette, I. c.) that the same man could not, twice in his life, have been the spokesman of a great national sorrow. (The argument that iii, 27 implies the youth of the writer hardly needs to be confuted.) Against it we have to set (1) the tradition on the other side embodied in the preface of the Septuagint ; (2) the contents of the book itself. Admitting that some of the calamities described in it may have been common to the invasions of Necho and Nebuchadnezzar, we yet look in vain for a single •word distinctive of a funeral dirge over a devout and zealous reformer like Josiah, while we find, step by step, the closest possible likeness between the pictures of mis- ery in the Lamentations and the events of the closing years of the reign of Zedekiah. The long siege had brought on the famine in which the young children fainted for hunger (Lam. ii, 11, 12, 20; iv, 4, 9; 2 Kings XXV, 3). The city was taken by storm (Lam. ii, 7 ; iv, 12; 2 (Jhron. xxxvi, 17). The Temple itself was pol- luted with the massacre of the priests who defended it (Lam. ii, 20, 21 ; 2 Chron. xxxvi, 17), and then destroy- ed (Lam. ii, G; 2 (Jhron. xxxvi, 19). The fortresses and strongholds of Judah were thrown down. The anointed of the Lord, under whose shadow the remnant of the people might have hoped to live in safety, was taken i)risoner (Lam. iv, 20 ; Jer. xxxix, 5). The chief of the people were carried into exile (Lam. i, 5; ii, 9; 2 Kings XXV, 11). The bitterest grief was found in the malignant exultation of the Edomites (Lam. iv, 21 ; Psa. cxxxvii, 7). Under the rule of the stranger the Sab- baths and solemn feasts were forgotten (Lam. i, 4; ii, G), as they could hardly have been during the short period in which Jerusalem was in the hands of the Egyptians. Unless we adopt the strained hypothesis that the whole poem is prophetic in the sense of being predictive, the writer seeing the future as if it were actually present, or the still wilder conjecture of Jarchi that this was the
roll which Jehoiachin destroyed, and which was re- written by Baruch or Jeremiah (Cari)zov, Introd. ad lib. F. T. iii, c. iv), we are compelled to come to the conclu- sion that the coincidence is not accidental, and to adopt the later, not the earlier of the dates. At what perioil after the capture of the city the prophet gave this ut- terance to his sorrow we can only conjecture, anil the materials for doing so with any probability are but scanty. The local tradition which pointed out a cavern in the neighborhood of . I erusalem as the refuge to which Jeremiah withdrew that he might write this book (Del Kio, Prolefj. in Thren., quoted by Carpzov, Introd. 1. c), is as trustworthy as most of tlie other legends of the time of Helena. He may have written it immediately alter the attack was over, or when he was with Geda- liah at IMizpeh, or when he was with his countrymen at Tahpanhes. Pareau refers ch. i to Jer. xxxvii, 5 sq. ; ch. iii to Jer. xxxviii, 2 sq. ; ch. iv to Jer. xxxix, 1 sq., and 2 Kings xxv, 1 sq. ; ch. ii to the destruction of the city and Temple ; ch. v is admitted to be the latest in order, and to refer to the time after that event. Ewald says that the situation is the same throughout, and only the time different. " In chaps, i and ii we find sorrow without consolation ; in ch. iii consolation for the poet himself; in chapter iv the lamentation is renewed with greater violence; but soon the whole people, as if urged by their own spontaneous impulse, fall to weeping and hoping" {Die Poetischen Biicher). De Wette describes the Lamentations some\vhat curtly, as "five songs re- lating to the destruction of the city of Jerusalem and its Temple (ch. i, ii, iv, v), and to the unhappy lot of the poet himself (chap. iii). The historical relation of the whole cannot be doubted ; but yet there seems a grad- ual ascent in describing the condition of the city" (AY«- leitung, § 273).