"Poetry" in Habakkuk 1:1-2:4?

Author(s): Robert D. Haak

Source: Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 108, No. 3 (Jul. - Sep., 1988), pp. 437-444
Published by: American Oriental Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/603864
Accessed: 04-11-2015 14:09 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the American
Oriental Society.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.211 on Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:09:47 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

"POETRY" IN HABAKKUK 1:1-2:4?'

ROBERTD. HAAK
AUGUSTANA
COLLEGE
James Kugel's study of the nature of Hebrew poetry has raised the question of the role of
parallelism within Hebrew poetry. The poetic nature of prophetic writings has historically been
particularly problematic. The present study concentrates on the various types of parallelism which
may be observed within the prophetic text Habakkuk 1:1-2:4. It appears that while semantic
parallelism alone may be too simplistic a standard for the determination of the "poetic" nature of
this passage, the interplay of semantic and grammatical parallelism in both near and more distant
contexts does characterize the text as "poetic." This study would suggest that, rather than
abandoning "parallelism" as a category for understanding poetic texts, the variety of parallelism
in specific texts needs further attention.

IN JAMESKUGEL'SRECENT
CRITIQUEof parallelism
as the constitutive element of Hebrew poetry, he

cussion of Habakkuk 3 in his work titled De re

metrica Hebraeorum.5 By 1902, F. T. Kelly published
"The Strophic Structure of Habakkuk," which was
the first study to argue for the poetic unity of the
entire book.6 The recent acceptance of the poetic
nature of the prophecy of Habakkuk may be exemplified by the fact that the prophecy is printed as "poetry"
in BHS.
Kugel is correct, however, in cautioning against
an uncritical acceptance of the prophetic books as
"poetry." He states, "Prophetic books ... pinpoint the
problem, for it is here that one encounters passages of
intermittent semantic paralleling and artful repetitions
amidst other lines lacking any obvious desire to
parallel or even employ the terse style that often
accompanies parallelism."7 A glance at the translation
provided below makes it clear that this mixture is also
present in the first section of the prophecy of Habakkuk. For example, once it is recognized that "Rock" is
an epithet of Yahweh, the third and fourth clauses of
1:12 would be considered by all to be "parallel."There
is a correspondence on both the grammatical and
semantic levels between both clauses. However, the
relationships between numerous other clauses within
this selection of prophecy are not nearly as clear.
Kugel correctly draws attention to these less clear
relationships. The present study will consider the various types of parallelism exhibited in these less clearly

reminds the reader that parallelism itself was not the

focus of Robert Lowth's famous lectures.2 They were

rather a "polemic aimed at destroying certain metrical

theories and an argument in a still older debate, the
relationship between poetry and prophecy."3 Prior to
Lowth's time, many had maintained a sharp distinction between "poetry" and "prophecy." Lowth argued
that since the prophetic writings do contain "parallelism" they must also have meter. Hence, the prophetic writings could be considered to be "poetry."4In
light of the centrality of prophecy to the historic
discussion of Hebrew poetry, it is appropriate that a

portion of a prophetic work be examined to determine

what poetic principles, if any, may be observed.
As might be expected, the prophecy of Habakkuk
was not at the forefront of the debate concerning the
relationship between poetry and the prophets. However, the success of Lowth's arguments ascribing parallelism, and hence poetry, to the prophets can be seen
by the fact that by 1880 Gietmann included a dis-

An earlier version of this paper was read at the Annual

Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, New York,
NY, 21 December 1982, with the title "'Seconding' in
Habakkuk 1:1-2:4?"
2 Cf. Robert Lowth, Lectures on the Sacred Poetry of the
Hebrews, trans. Calvin E. Stowe (Andover, Mass.: Codman
Press, 1829). These lectures were first published in 1753.
3 James L.
Kugel, The Idea of Biblical Poetry (New Haven
and London: Yale University Press, 1981), p. 204.
4
Kugel,The Idea,p. 281.

5 GerardusGietmann,De re metrica Hebraeorum

(Freiburg:Herder,1880),pp. 77ff.
6
F. T. Kelly, "The Strophic Structureof Habakkuk,"

AJSL 18 (1902):94-119.
7

Kugel,TheIdea,p. 82.

437

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.211 on Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:09:47 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

438

Journal of the American Oriental Society 108.3 (1988)

parallellines in the text of Hab 1:1-2:4. Is therea lack

of "anyobviousdesireto parallel"as Kugelsuggests?
The most obvious level of relationship between
lines is on the semanticlevel:how the meaningsof the
wordsinterrelate.This is the type of parallelismhighlightedin Lowth'sstudies.But othertypes of parallelism have been proposedmore recently.The worksof
T. Collins,8S. Geller,9M. O'Connor,land A. Berlinl'
have greatly increasedawarenessof what might be
broadlycalled grammaticalparallelism.This includes
both morphological and syntactic relationships.
Among recent studies of Hebrew poetic devices,
D. Pardee'spapersconcerningparallelismwithinboth
Ugariticand Hebrewliteratureshould be noted.l2In
these studies he draws attention to the structural
importanceof the so-called"minorelements"in the
lines of Hebrewpoetry.In the firstof these studieshe
also drawsattentionto the relativeorderof the words
in a given line and the position of a line within the
largerunit. This he terms"positionalparallelism."
Kugel appears to consider these and other nonsemantictypesof parallelismas somewhatdeficientas
types of parallelism.He states, "Indeed,the whole
notion of syntactic, morphological,phonetic, etc.,
parallelism is a relatively recent critical creation,
which, howevervalid, seems to have been devisedin
the necessityof salvagingthe principleof parallelism
for lines where semanticsimilaritieswere obviously
lacking.''l3Whilehe appearsto be denying(or almost
denying)the term"parallelism"
to these non-semantic
relationships, he clearly does not discount their
8 Cf. TerenceCollins,Line-Forms in Hebrew Poetry, Studia
Pohl Series Maior, no. 7 (Rome: Biblical InstitutePress,
1978).
9 Cf. Stephen A. Geller, Parallelism in Early Biblical
Poetry, HarvardSemitic Monographs,no. 20 (Missoula,
Montana:ScholarsPress,1979).
' M. O'Connor,Hebrew Verse Structure (WinonaLake,
Indiana:Eisenbrauns,1980).
1l Cf., e.g., Adele Berlin,"Grammatical
Aspectsof Biblical
Parallelism,"IIUCA 50 (1979):17-43.Cf. also the worksof
Wilfred Watson such as "GenderMatched Synonymous
Parallelism,"
JBL 99 (1980):321-41.
12 Dennis Pardee, "Ugariticand Hebrew Poetry: Parallelism."Paperdeliveredat the FirstInternationalSymposium
on the Antiquitiesof Palestine,Aleppo, 1980;and "Types
and Distributionsof Parallelismin Ugaritic and Hebrew
Poetry."Communicationpreparedfor the AnnualMeeting
of the Societyof BiblicalLiterature,New York,21 December
1982.
13 Kugel,The Idea, p. 49.

importancein understandingthe relationshipbetween

clauses. Grammaticalelementsmake up a large part
of the principleswhich Kugel identifiesas active in
"differentiation.
"
Kugel suggeststhat betweentwo clauses whichare
in relationto each other there must be both connection and separation.He says, "Howis B's subjunction
to be accomplished?The dangers are, on the one
hand, the lack of a clear break between A and B,
causingthe two to mergeinto a single assertion;and
on the other hand, the lack of a clear connection
between the two, so that A + B become isolated,
independentassertions.Their separation(or, rather,
separability)is largelya matterof syntax.In establishing their connection, grammaticaland semanticelements both have a crucial role."14 An important
contributionof Kugel'swork is his discussionof the
methodsby whichtwo clausesaredifferentiated.
In his discussionof differentiationhe includessuch
elementsas alternationof prefixedand suffixedverbal
forms, alternationof singularand pluralforms,alternationsof abstractand concreteterms,alternationof
possessive suffixes with definite nouns, changes in
grammaticalperson, the use of various double duty
elements (such as pronouns, prepositions,conjunctions, interrogatives,negations, etc.), prepositional
alternations,and some uses of 5D. As the very term
"differentiation"
indicates,Kugelstressesthe separating functionof theseelements.
Whilein the lines whichKugelexamines,it may be
important to stress the "differentness"of the two
clauses, in Habakkuk and much of the prophetic
material,the distinctionbetween the two clauses is
often very clear. What is needed is a better understandingof how the authordrawstogetherapparently
dissimilarstatements.While the integratingrole of
those elementswhich are repeatedin these dissimilar
lines is easy to recognize,Kugel'sinsight that differentiationmay also unitethe line opensfurtheravenues
for understanding.He states, "To the extent that B
identifiesitself as A's 'mereparallel,'it assertsA = B;
while to the extent that it differentiatesitself from A
in meaningand morphology,it assertsA + B to be a
single statement.
B becomesA's complementor completion. Differentiation,in a word, integrates the
sentence,assertsits unity.''ls
At the outset of the examinationof Hab 1:1-2:4,
the problem of the definition of the unit under
discussionmust be confronted.What is the "unit"in
14 Kugel, The Idea, p. 54.
t5 Kugel, The Idea, p. 16.

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.211 on Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:09:47 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HAAK:"Poetry" in Habakkuk 1:1-2:4?

1:2?In Kugel's terms, what is the A and what is the B;
what the first part and what the second? There does
not seem to be any doubt that a pause, or comma,
occurs within the first line. "How long, O Yahweh,
have I cried out," comma, "but you do not hear?"To
define this line as the unit and to make the evaluation
that there is very little or no parallelism between part
A and part B seems to miss the major features of the
verse-its parallelism with the next line. "I call to
you, 'Violence!' but you do not deliver?" The close
semantic connection between "I cried out" and "I
called to you" and the phrases "you do not hear" and
"you do not deliver" is apparent. In spite of the
differentiation within these lines, the lines themselves
are drawn together closely, particularly by the grammatical parallelism of the negative phrases with MK
followed by the preformative second person verbal
forms. The author of Habakkuk uses this same device
to draw together distinct clauses in other places in the
book, specifically in 2:3 and 2:5. The two lines of 1:2
seen in isolation do not display close parallelism on
either the semantic or grammatical levels. Apparently
they are intended to be seen together, however, as
parallels on both semantic and grammatical levels
across what might be considered individual units.
Once it is admitted that the phenomenon of parallelism on the semantic and grammatical levels can
exist across adjacent lines (what Pardee calls "near
parallelism"), it must be at least theoretically possible
for this same phenomenon to exist across greater
distances (what Pardee calls "distant parallelism").'6
It appears that the usage of the dual negative clauses
in 1:2 is related by more than chance to the similar
usage in 2:3. In fact, these verses, which are only
loosely related semantically, seem to form a type of
inclusio. The prophet asks, "How long?" in 1:2. The
answer comes in 2:3, "It will not delay." While the
connection between these lines might have been perceived simply on the basis of content, the use of
parallel grammatical forms highlights the relationship
and draws the entire section more closely together.
Throughout this section of Habakkuk, and indeed the
entire book, it is the interplay of the parallelism on
both the semantic and grammatical levels within lines,
in "near parallelism," and in "distant parallelism,"
which seems to mark this material as "poetic."
V 3 exhibits a similarly complex set of relationships
on all three levels. The first and second clauses of the
line are connected semantically and grammatically by
the use of the second person prefixed verbal forms.
16 Cf. n. 12 above.

439

These verbs are differentiated, however, by the fact

that one is a causative with a pronominal suffix while
the other is non-causative and non-suffixed. The
suffixed verbal form in the first clause serves to bring
the third clause more closely into the unit since the
third clause also contains a first person suffixed form.
Another feature which integrates the line of v 3 is a
combination of word order and the use of words
which very often are associated with each other
in pairs. As the verse is written, "iniquity"/"trouble"
and "strife"/"contention" fall in adjacent clauses. The
author, however, has used a chiastic word order in the
line to bring the words together in the actual text.
The use of the word pair "destruction and violence" in
the third clause highlights this juxtaposition of the frequently paired words in the first and last lines and
draws all three lines together around these paired
words. William Holladay has noted this type of
parallelism and termed it "isomorphic balance.""7
It should also be noticed that v 3 is drawn into
connection with the previous verse in at least two
ways. The most obvious is the repetition of the noun
"violence" in the third clause of v 3. In addition, v 2
and the first line of v 3 are related syntactically by the
fact that they both begin with an interrogative whose
force is extended to the second part of the line.
These observations concerning the relationships
between v 3 and the adjacent lines do not exhaust the
relationships which may be observed. Even a cursory
glance at 1:13 shows a close connection between it
and vv 3-4. Just as in v 3, the verbs of the first line of
v 13 are built on the parallelism between x/;H and
/t0::3.As in v 3, a pairing of terms is found ("evil"/
"trouble"), one of which is the same term as found in
v 3. Finally, in the second line of v 13 the interrogative
;1?5 is used in conjunction with :13,just as is the case
in v 3. That these parallels are not simply the product
of chance seems to be confirmed by the fact that in
both cases the following theme is a description of the
fate of the "Righteous One" at the hand of the
"Wicked One." In v 4 it is stated that the Wicked One
"surrounds" the Righteous One while in v 13 the
reference is to "swallowing." The verbal root found in
"surrounds" in v 4 (v'ln) is quite rare, occurring
only six times in the Hebrew Bible. Yet in Ps 22:13-14
the themes of "surrounding" and "swallowing" are
collocated. M. Dahood translates, "Strong bulls surround me ( :31:0), wild bulls of Bashan encircle me
('l3'iD). They open their mouths (12O) against me, like
17 William Holladay, "The Recovery of Poetic Passages of
Jeremiah," JBL 85 (1966):408.

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.211 on Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:09:47 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

440

Journalof the AmericanOrientalSociety 108.3 (1988)

a ravening (llV) and raging (1RW)lion."18 Terms

derivedboth from /1nD and /Y58 are also used in
contexts of militarydefeat(cf. Judg 20:43and 2 Sam
20:19-20).Whileit is undoubtedlytoo muchto speak
of a "brokenfixed pair"in this case, the fact that
these two themes are relatedin other contexts may
indicatethat the authorof v 13 had vv 3-4 in mind
when constructingthe line. While it might be argued
that"surrounding"
and"swallowing"
haveno semantic
parallelsin the individualline, the examinationof the
more distant lines seems to indicatethat they are in
fact in a relationshipwhich may be called "distant
parallelism."
The distant parallelismof v 4 is not restrictedto
v 13.The nearparallelismbetweenthe two linesof v 4
which involves the alternationof "ordergoing forth"
with "ordernot going forth"is pickedup againin v 7.
V 7 seems to be constructedas a counterpointto the
contentionof Habakkukin v 4 that "orderdoes not
go forth" or, at best, that it "goes forth crooked."
Withinv 7 itself little semanticparallelismexists. As
in v 3, pairedterms in a similarposition are used to
bring the two clauses together, another example of
Holladay's"isomorphicbalance."
The internal parallelismof the first line of v 4 is
evident. "Law"and "order"are often found in conjunction in Hebrew,much as in English.The verbal
phrasesalso form a type of synonymousparallelism
which Adele Berlin has called "Positive-Negative"
parallelism.
'9
The internalparallelismof the second line of v 4 is
admittedlyquite weak, possibly to highlightits connectionto the secondpartof v 13 as describedearlier.
Theuse of thecontrastingterms"Wicked"/"Righteous"
and "order"/"crooked"
in the respectiveparts of the
line does tend to drawthe line together.The realforce
whichbringsall the clausesof v 4 together,however,
is the strong parallelismof the second part of the
second line with the firstline of the verse.20The fact
that three of the four elementsof the last clause are
repeatedfrom the firstline, particularlythe repetition
of the minorelementD 5Y, locks the firstpart of the
second line into the structureeven though it only fits
loosely on semanticandgrammaticalgrounds.Pardee
has found this same phenomenonin operationin the
'Anat text and considers it a type of "positional

18 Mitchell Dahood, Psalms I, Anchor Bible 16 (Garden

City:Doubleday& Company,1966),p. 137.
'9 Berlin,"Grammatical
Aspects,"pp. 35-36.
20 This was pointed out by John S. Kselman,"TheABCB
Pattern:FurtherExamples,"VT32 (1982):224-29.

parallelism."2'Thus, althoughthe closest parallelsto

the firstpart of the secondline are found in v 13 and
the closest parallelsto the secondpartin v 7, the near
parallelismwith the firstline of the verse is sufficient
to allowboth linesto be perceivedas a unit.
The first three clauses of 1:5 should probablybe
read as a unit. In the first clause, the parallelism
formed between the words based on /^tXl and on
/t:m] whichwas notedin 1:3and 1:13is repeated,but
in this case within the first clause and with Yahweh
speakingratherthan Habakkuk.The close semantic
connectionbetweenthesetwo roots and /nnn which
is found in the second clause is shown more clearly
when it is noted that nnn means literally"to look in
astonishmentat X" (cf. BDB, p. 1069and Gen43:33).
The firstand the secondclausesare also connectedby
the repetition of the imperativeverbal forms. The
relatively uncommon use of the double imperative
from the same root in the second clausedrawsit into
connectionwith the thirdline with its prominentuse
offigura etymologica basedon /5YO.
Whilethe firstthreeclausesof v 5 are connectedas
a unit semanticallyandgrammatically,the positionof
the last clause is more difficultto determine.At first
glance it appears that it has no semantic or grammatical relationshipto the lines surroundingit and
might be what has been termed an "orphanline."
Theremay be some evidence,however,that this line is
intendedto be read as the firstclause of the following
unit. The first observationwhich supportsthis connection is the possible parallelismbetweenl]'DXnin
the last clauseof v 5 and the DPDof the firstclauseof
v6. In English the semantic relationship is not
especiallyclear, but in the Hebrew both words are
related to "stability"in the nominal forms and to
"establishing"in the verbal forms. Although it is a
very problematicpassage(cf. Deut 28:66),these two
roots are in fact usedin conjunctionin Job 24:22.The
Job passagemay be translated,"He lures the mighty
with his power, he is established(:lp') and truly
stands firm (t'DX'-X51)in life."22In addition to the
semantic connection between l]'DXn and D'p8, the
fact that both termsareused in the Hiphilconjugation
maytend to drawthemtogether.
Anotherfeaturewhichmay tie the last clauseof v 5
to the beginningof v 6 is a type of positionalparallelism.The phrase,"Youwill not believeevenif it was
told,"functionsto introducethe ': clause,"forbehold

Pardee,"Ugariticand HebrewPoetry,"pp. lOff.

Cf. MarvinH. Pope,Job,AnchorBible 15(GardenCity:
Doubleday& Company,1973),p. 189.
21

22

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.211 on Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:09:47 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HAAK: "Poetry" in Habakkuk 1:1-2:4?

I am raising up the Chaldeans," in much the same

way that the imperatives of the first clause of v 5 serve
to introduce the "' clause, "for a work is working in
your days." The ': clause of v 4 may also be compared.
Another relationship which may be relevant is the
inclusio formed by the negative clause, "You will not
believe," at the beginning of the unit with the negative
clause, "dwellings not his own," which concludes the
verse. Finally, the distant parallelism of the phrase
"not believe" in the last clause of v 5 with the statement made in 2:4 that the "Righteous One because of
its fidelity will live" should be noted. In both cases the
object of belief is indicated by the ambiguous third
masculine singular forms. If the analysis of the clause
in v 5 suggested here is accurate, it would appear that
the antecedent of these ambiguous forms would be the
vision of the raising of the Chaldeans (cf. 1:6 and 2:2).
Because of the complex nature of the textual evidence, any analysis of v 8 and the first clause of v 9
must remain tentative at best. The readings adopted
here are only one possibility in a wide range of
readings and clause divisions which have been proposed.23 It appears that the key to the understanding
of the first part of v 8 lies in the recognition of the fact
that it is a three clause unit. This is first signaled by
the similarity of form for the verbs beginning each
clause, 1l7//l nl//1WJl. In addition to the grammatical parallelism between the terms, all three stress
the quickness of the troops. "Swifter," from V/5p
literally means "to be light." "Sharper," from \/Trn,
can also have the connotation of quickness. "Prancing," from \/U1D, is used to describe the steps of
calves in other contexts. Also interesting is the distribution of the nouns in the unit. The first clause
mentions both wild animals and horses. The second
clause concentrates on the wild animals while the
third clause further specifies the type of horses intended in clause A. The effect is that, although the
comparison is dropped in the third clause, the clauses
still form a tightly bound unit (cf. 1:16).
The following unit, composed of the rest of v 8 and
the first clause of v9 is another instance where
significant parallelism appears across the boundary of
the line. While there is a clear semantic and grammatical connection within the first line, "they come"
paralleling "they fly," the repetition of the singular "he
comes" at the end of the second line ties these two
lines closely together. The connection between the

23

For a more detailed discussion of the major proposals cf.

Robert D. Haak, "HabakkukAmong the Prophets"(Ph.D

dissertation,Universityof Chicago,1986),pp. 87-94.

441

lines is heightened by the fact that the second line

which is dependent on
begins with the participle %Un
the last word of the previous line.
In addition to this near parallelism, there also
appears to be distant parallelism exhibited with v 6.
On both the grammatical and semantic levels there is
a parallel between "the one acting quickly to devour"
in v 8 and the "one walking in order to dispossess" in
v 6. Because of this grammatical parallelism it might
also be suggested that onn? be revocalized to the
infinitive and translated "in order to do violence he
comes." This temptation should be resisted, however,
since the use of the nominal form of onn here repeats
the theme begun in v 2 and continued in v 3. In this
way the "violence" of the Wicked One is brought into
relationship with the even more overwhelming violence
of the Chaldeans. Finally, it may be noted that the
balance of the prepositions 'Z and '5 in the phrases
"from far away" and "for violence" may function as
an inclusio.
No convincing explanation of the last line of v 9
has yet been offered. It seems probable that the
meaning of the first clause is roughly equivalent to the
"gathering of captives" of the second clause. A similar
action is reported in 2:5, just outside the section
considered in the present study. In spite of the problematic nature of the line and although our understanding of phonetic parallelism is very limited, it may
be observed that irn, "as sand," appears to be
phonetically parallel to the ;'*: which appears earlier
in v 9 and the '5 1,1 in v 11. The collocation of :, 5,
and /n/n can also be seen in the ' M1::l 1;1and 1':n5b RM1;,
in v 10. Another possible example of phonetic

parallelism may be seen in ;'l"Tj?of v 9 and D'pt1 'nK

inv 12.
V 10 illustrates the phenomenon seen several times
already, the parallelism between adjacent lines appearing to be as strong or stronger than that within the
line. The first line forms a nicely balanced unit in
itself. Although the grammatical function of the terms
is clearly differentiated in the two parts, "kings"forms
a parallel on the semantic level to "rulers"and there is
a correspondence between "he lays low," literally "he
scoffs at," and "they are a joke." The third person
independent pronoun used as the subject at the beginning of the first clause is balanced by the suffixed
third person pronoun used at the end of the second
clause.
The second line, seen in isolation, would appear to
be a clear example of what Kugel terms a "Sequence
of Actions."24 While this is clearly the case, the fact of
24

Kugel, The Idea, p. 4.

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.211 on Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:09:47 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

442

Journal of the American Oriental Society 108.3 (1988)

the sequence of actions is nearly obscured by the

strong near parallelism across the boundary of the
line. The repetition of X'1nand the same root in the
noun "joke" and the verb "laughs at" draws the third
clause closely to the second. Although the fourth
clause is clearly subordinated to the third by the use
of the pronoun suffix referring to the fortified city, it
is also in a close relationship to the first line of the
verse. The verb translated somewhat colloquially as
"lays low" is intended to contrast the humiliation
usually associated with the various forms of V/OSi
with the opposite connotation associated with the
verb V/'t, "to pile up." Again, the phonetic similarities of 'ltn in the third clause and '15 17:: in the
fourth may be noted.
It appears that v 11 could also be described as a
"sequence of actions" much like that found in v 10.
The relative rarity of the prefixed verbal form with the
conversive waw at the end of a clause in Habakkuk
makes the occurrence of this phenomenon in the last
clause of v 10 and the first clause of v 11 quite
striking. This appears to be a case where the connection between two lines is accomplished not by semantic
parallelism but by word order and grammatical parallelism. The sequential nature of the three verbal forms
in v 11 is enhanced by the inverted word order in the
second clause of the line which brings forward the
verb and positionally associates it with the preceding
verbs. If the proposed interpretation of TXas a rare
demonstrative pronoun parallel to another rare demonstrative (1T)is accepted, these terms would serve to tie
the two clauses closely together. Even if TKis understood as the more common adverb usually translated
"then," phonetic parallelism would tend to have the
same effect.
A cursory overview makes it clear that all three
levels of parallelism can also be seen in the following

verses. There are clear parallels on the semantic and

grammatical levels within lines (cf. 2:1). Both semantic
and grammatical parallels function between adjacent
lines (cf. 2:3). Some of the distant parallelism of these
lines has already been noted (cf. 1:13 and 1:3-4).
While argument might be raised concerning individual points of comparison in this discussion and
undoubtedly further points of comparison could be
made, two general observations seem to be in order.
The first is that, although semantic parallelism is the
strongest and most evident of the types of parallelism
which have been observed, other types of parallelism
seem to function to bring clauses into relationship
with each other. Of these types, the general category
of grammatical parallelism seems to be the most
important. Although grammatical parallelism does
function in units which are semantically parallel, it
also appears to function in those units which have
been semantically differentiated.
The second observation is that all types of parallelism function not only within a given line but between
adjacent lines (near parallelism) and even over considerable distances (distant parallelism). Thus, while a
line may appear to be semantically and grammatically
differentiated when viewed in isolation, parallelism on
both levels often occurs quite clearly when the line is
viewed in the wider context. At times, such as in the
second line of 1:4, it even appears that the inner-line
and near parallels are weakened in order to draw
particular attention to the distant parallelism. Thus,
while Kugel may be correct that parallelism per se
does not define Hebrew poetry, the present study
would seem to indicate that the function of parallelism
within Hebrew prophetic writing must remain the
object of close attention.

HABAKKUK 1:1-2:4a

The First Complaint

Superscription
The oracle which Habakkuk the prophet saw:

1:2

a For complete notes on the text being discussedsee my

"HabakkukAmongthe Prophets"(Ph.D. dissertation,Uni-

How long, O Yahweh, shall I cry out

but you do not hear?
I call to you, "Violence!"
but you do not deliver?

1:3

Why do you allow me to see iniquity?

And (why do) you look upon trouble?

1:1

versity of Chicago, 1986).

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.211 on Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:09:47 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HAAK:"Poetry" in Habakkuk 1:1-2:4?

Destruction and violence are in my presence.
Strife exists! Indeed, contention rages!b
1:4

Therefore, law is weak.

Indeed, order does not ever go forth,
for the Wicked One surrounds the Righteous
One.
Therefore, order goes forth crooked.
The First Oracle

1:5

1:6

He laughs at every fortified city

and heaps up earth and captures it.
1:11 Then he sweeps along (like) the windh and
passes by.
This, his power, devastatesi for his god.
1:12 Indeed, you are from primeval times, O Yahweh,
My holy God, we shall not die!
O Yahweh, for order you established him.
O Rock, for adjudication you founded him.

Look at the nations and see!

Be astonished! Be astounded!
For I am doing a deed in your days.
You will not believe even if it were told,
for behold, I am raising up the Chaldeans,
that nation bitter and skilled,
the one walking on the broad places of the
earth
in order to dispossess the one whose dwellings
are not his own.C
The First Response

The Second Complaint

1:13 Too pure of eyes to see evil,
and to look upon trouble you are not able,
why do you look upon the treacherous ones
and keep silent
when the Wicked One swallows
the one more righteous than himself?
1:14 And why do you make man as the fish of the
sea,
as creatures, none ruling over them?

1:7

He is too terrible and dreadful for us.d

His order and his ragee go forth.

1:8

Swifter than leopards are his steeds,

Sharper than wolves in the evening.
Prancing are his horses.

1:15 All with a fishhook he brings up.

He drags him away with his net.
He gathers him up with his seine.
Therefore, he is glad and rejoices.

His horsemen come from far away.

They fly as an eagle, acting quickly to devour.
The whole (host) comes for the violent one.
The multitudef of their faces are forward.g

1:16 Therefore, he sacrifices to his net

and burns to his seine,
for by them fat is his portion
and his food is fatness.

1:9

He gathers captives as sand.

1:10 Indeed, he lays kings low
and rulers are a joke to him.

1:17 Therefore, he will indeedi empty his net

continually.
From slaying nations he shall not refrain.
2:1

Readingas if from /TKVtwith HermannGunkel,Schopfung und Chaosin Urzeitund Endzeit(Gottingen:Vanden-

443

Upon my post I will surely stand,

and I will surely station myself upon (my)
watch.

hoeck & Ruprecht, 1895), p. 33. Cf. 1:7.

c It is suggestedthat '1WKhas beenomittedfromthe
phrase

as if oftenthe casein Hebrewpoeticconstruction.

d Reading13= with the first line of the verse as the first
person plural form. Cf. Num 13:31.
e Cf. note b above. This derivation was suggested orally by
Gosta W. Ahlstrom of the University of Chicago Divinity
School.

f Readingas fromArabic\/O?l. Cf. BDB, p. 168.

g Cf. G. W. Ahlstrom, "Judges 5:20f. and History," JNES
36 (1977):287.

h For this methodof

expressingthe comparativecf. G-K,

par. 118r.
i FromVDtR, "to devastate."Cf. G. R. Driver,"Confused
Hebrew Roots," in Occidentand Orient[GasterFS], ed.
Bruno Schindler(London: Taylor's Foreign Press, 1936),
pp. 75-77.
J Cf. BDB, p. 210a on the use of interrogative heh to state
the emphatic.

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.211 on Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:09:47 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

444

Journal of the American Oriental Society 108.3 (1988)

I will watch closely to see
what he will speak against me
and what I will reply to my prosecutor.k
The Second Oracle

2:2

But Yahweh answered and said:

Write the vision! Make it clear upon the tablets
so that the one reading it will run!

2:3

For the vision is a "testifier" at the appointed

time,

k Cf. Hos
5:2; Prov 29:1.

indeed, a witness at the end and does not lie.

He tarries!?Wait for him!
For surely he comes. He will not delay!
2:4

Behold, swollen, not smooth,1 will be

his gullet within him,
but the Righteous One because of its fidelity
will live.

Cf. W. Boyd Barrick,"The Straight-LeggedCherubim

of Ezekiel's Inaugural Vision (Ezekiel 1:7a)," CBQ 44
(1982):543-44for this nuanceof UIt".

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.211 on Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:09:47 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions